DOCSLIB.ORG

Technical Report Template and User Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Technical Report Template and User Guide OVERVIEW OF COAL-TO-LIQUIDS: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE June 2020 Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed therein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. All images in this report were created by NETL, unless otherwise noted. OVERVIEW OF COAL-TO-LIQUIDS: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Exhibits ..........................................................................................................................ii Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................... iii Executive Summary............................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2 2 Background.................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Direct Processes....................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Indirect Processes .................................................................................................... 4 3 Early History (1913–1950) ................................................................................................ 6 3.1 The Bergius Process.................................................................................................. 6 3.2 The Karrick Process .................................................................................................. 6 4 Mid-Twentieth Century Developments (1950–2000) ..................................................... 8 4.1 International ............................................................................................................ 8 4.1.1 Sasol CTL ........................................................................................................... 8 4.1.2 MHI NEDOL Process .......................................................................................... 8 4.1.3 Shenhua DCL .................................................................................................... 9 4.2 United States............................................................................................................ 9 4.2.1 Overview........................................................................................................... 9 4.2.2 U.S. Department of Energy Coal Liquefaction Program................................. 9 4.3 Industrial CTL Development .................................................................................. 10 4.3.1 H-Coal Process ............................................................................................... 11 4.3.2 Solvent Refined Coal Process ........................................................................ 11 4.3.3 Methanol to Gasoline .................................................................................... 11 4.3.4 Chevron Coal Liquefaction Process .............................................................. 12 4.3.5 VEBA-Combi-Cracking ................................................................................... 12 5 Recent Developments, United States (2000–2020) ..................................................... 14 5.1 Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 ................................................ 14 5.2 NETL-DOD/Air Force Collaboration—Coal/Biomass to Jet Fuel Projects (2014– 2017) . .................................................................................................................... 14 5.3 Notable Recent R&D at NETL ................................................................................ 15 5.4 Planned CTL Projects in the United States ............................................................ 16 5.5 Economics of CTL .................................................................................................. 16 5.6 Environmental Considerations of CTL ................................................................... 18 6 Current Challenges/Next Steps ................................................................................... 20 7 Summary....................................................................................................................... 21 8 References ................................................................................................................... 22 Appendix A: New CTL Plants in China................................................................................ 28 Appendix B: NETL/U.S. DOD Air Force Coal-to-Jet Fuel Projects ....................................... 29 i OVERVIEW OF COAL-TO-LIQUIDS: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 2-1. Summary of various CTL methods ...................................................................... 3 Exhibit 3-1. Schematic of the Karrick process (U.S. patent no. 1,958,918) .......................... 7 Exhibit 5-1. CTL projects proposed in the U.S...................................................................... 16 Exhibit 5-2. Estimations of costs for production of liquid fuels by CTL ................................ 17 Exhibit 5-3. Estimations of CO2 lifecycle emissions in production of liquid fuels by CTL .... 19 Exhibit A-1. New CTL plants in China (2015-2020), by application and feed rate............ 28 ii OVERVIEW OF COAL-TO-LIQUIDS: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS bbl Barrel MHI Mitsubishi Heavy Industries BP British Petroleum MJ Megajoule bpd Barrels per day MM Million CAER University of Kentucky Center MSG Molten Salt Gasification for Applied Energy Research MTG Methanol-to-gasoline CCLP Chevron Coal Liquefaction MW Megawatt Process N2 Nitrogen CCS Carbon capture and storage NETL National Energy Technology CO Carbon monoxide Laboratory CO2 Carbon dioxide O2 Oxygen CPI Consumer Price Index OPEC Organization of the Petroleum CTL Coal-to-liquids Exporting Countries DCL Direct coal liquefaction PRB Powder River Basin DME Dimethyl ether psi Pounds per square inch DOD Department of Defense R&D Research and development DOE Department of Energy RIC Research and Innovation EDS Exxon Donor Solvent Center EISA Energy Independence and ROI Return on investment Security Act RSP Required Selling Price Fe5C2 Iron carbide Sasol South African Synthetic Oil FT Fischer-Tropsch Limited g Grams SRC Solvent refined coal Gal Gallon STG+ Synthesis gas to Gasoline Plus TM GHG Greenhouse gas TOGAS Topsoe Improved Gasoline Synthesis H/C Hydrogen/carbon tonne Metric ton H2 Hydrogen tpd Tonnes per day H2O Water TRIGTM Transport Integrated HRI Hydrogen Research Gasification Incorporated HTI Headwaters Inc. and U.S. United States Hydrocarbon Technologies VCC VEBA-Combi-Cracking Inc./Headwaters Technology WTI West Texas Intermediate Incorporated (crude oil) IGCC Integrated gasification $MM Million dollars combined cycle °C Degrees Celsius LPG Liquefied petroleum gas °F Degrees Fahrenheit MESA Mission Execution and Strategic Analysis iii OVERVIEW OF COAL-TO-LIQUIDS: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE This page intentionally left blank. iv OVERVIEW OF COAL-TO-LIQUIDS: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides an overview of the technology for synthesizing liquid fuels from coal, history of development in the 20th century up to early 21st century including the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE)- and National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)- supported work, its costs and environmental impacts, and current challenges and opportunities with particular reference to the United States. Coal-to-liquids (CTL) technology enables conversion of abundant coal into valuable liquid fuels such as gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. Methods include indirect conversion (coal to syngas, which can be converted to liquid hydrocarbons) or direct conversion (by various direct coal liquefaction methods). Early 20th century development of technologies gave way to wartime use in Germany and post-war commercial implementation in South Africa. The U.S. oil crisis of the 1970s gave impetus to a sustained research and development (R&D) program for CTL—by DOE in the last quarter of the 20th century, work in industry, and collaborations, which resulted in a suite of technologies for innovative CTL technologies, some of which have been deployed commercially. NETL has been recently assessing and developing CTL technology through process feasibility, cost determinations, and lifecycle emissions studies, plus a notable collaboration with the Department of Defense (DOD)/U.S. Air Force on a set of projects in 2014–2017 aimed at technology development for reducing costs and emissions associated with synthetic jet fuel production from coal. This work has shown
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Techno-Economic Analysis of Synthetic Fuels Pathways Integrated with Light Water Reactors
    INL/EXT-20-59775 Revision 0 Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program Techno-Economic Analysis of Synthetic Fuels Pathways Integrated with Light Water Reactors September 2020 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy DISCLAIMER This information was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness, of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. INL/EXT-20-59775 Revision 0 Techno-Economic Analysis of Synthetic Fuels Pathways Integrated with Light Water Reactors L. Todd Knighton, Daniel S. Wendt (INL) Lesley Snowden-Swan, Jeromy Jenks, Shuyun Li, Steven Phillips, and Jalal Askander (PNNL) September 2020 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Page intentionally left blank EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Synthetic fuels (synfuels) and chemicals (synchems) are produced by synthesis from chemical building blocks rather than by conventional petroleum refining. Synthesis gas or syngas (carbon monoxide and hydrogen) is a common intermediate building block in the production of synfuels and synchems.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Evaluation of Semi-Synthetic Jet Fuels
    COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF SEMI-SYNTHETIC JET FUELS FINAL REPORT Prepared for Coordinating Research Council, Inc. 3650 Mansell Road, Suite 140 Alpharetta, GA 30022 Universal Technology Corporation 1270 North Fairfield Road Dayton, OH 4432 Prepared by Clifford A. Moses Consultant New Braunfels, Texas CRC Project No. AV-2-04a Funded by U.S. Air Force Research Laboratories Contract F33415-02-D-2299 through Universal Technology Corporation September 2008 This page intentionally left blank for back-to-back printing COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF SEMI­SYNTHETIC JET FUELS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report compares the properties and characteristics of five blends of individual synthetic paraffinic kerosenes with petroleum-based Jet A, Jet A-1 or JP-8 fuel to make semi-synthetic jet fuels (SSJF). The study was requested by the aviation fuel community to provide technical support for the acceptance of synthetic paraffinic kerosenes (SPK) derived from synthesis gas as blending streams up to 50%(v) in fuel specifications for aviation turbine fuel. The methodology for comparison was to be the properties and characteristics used in the original evaluation of the Sasol semi-synthetic jet fuel (SSJF) which has experienced 9 years of successful service since it was approved for use as commercial jet fuel by DEF STAN 91-91 in 1998. The SPK used by Sasol in the original SSJF was produced by a Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) process using synthesis gas derived from coal. The synthesis gases for the four new candidates were produced from natural gas. The details of the F-T process conditions and the downstream processing differed among the five SPK fuels.
    [Show full text]
  • Wave Liquefaction™ Combines Gaseous and Solid Hydrocarbons to Cleanly and Efficiently Produce Liquid Fuels Or Chemicals and Ca
    Wave Liquefaction™ The Novel Coal-Biomass to Liquids Process George Skoptsov [email protected] H Quest Vanguard, Inc James Strohm [email protected] 750 William Pitt Way : Pittsburgh, PA 15238 Wave Liquefaction™ With only 15% biomass feed combines gaseous and solid and no CCS, lifecycle CO2 hydrocarbons to cleanly and emissions are 22% less than efficiently produce liquid fuels or for transportation fuels from chemicals and carbon char. Gases Solids Liquids Carbon conventional oil refining. SYNCRUDE COMPOSITION BACKGROUND TECHNOLOGY VERSATILITY Wave Liquefaction™ syncrude yields are Wave Liquefaction™ process was originally developed with the specific goal of establishing Properties of the Wave Liquefaction™ liquid product (aromaticity, density, 50%-65% wt (on dry, ash-free basis). the vast US coal resources as an alternative, cost-effective domestic source of military jet H:C ratio) can be widely varied by adjusting energy input, feedstock and Liquid product flows at room temperature, fuel with the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions below those of a conventional crude oil gas composition. The product aromaticity can be made close to 100%, has API > 10, and < 50% aromaticity. Low refining process. Blending coal with 15% biomass by weight will decrease lifecycle CO2 with as much as 20% of the liquid yield consisting of the BTEX fraction. asphaltene content reduces requirements emissions by more than 20% relative to conventional gasoline production without use of Industrial non-fuel uses for these liquid and solid products include: for downstream hydrotreating needed to any carbon capture or sequestration solutions. Carbon pitch for production of aluminum smelting anodes: produce finished fuels.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Advances in Direct Coal Liquefaction
    Energies 2010, 3, 155-170; doi:10.3390/en3020155 OPEN ACCESS energies ISSN 1996-1073 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies Review Recent Advances in Direct Coal Liquefaction Hengfu Shui 1, Zhenyi Cai 1 and Chunbao (Charles) Xu 2,* 1 School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Anhui University of Technology, Maanshan 243002, Anhui, China; E-Mails: [email protected] (H.S.); [email protected] (Z.C.) 2 Department of Chemical Engineering, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario P7B 5E1, Canada * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-807-343-8761; Fax: +1-807-343-8928. Received: 16 November 2009 / Accepted: 19 January 2010 / Published: 27 January 2010 Abstract: The growing demand for petroleum, accompanied by the declining petroleum reserves and the concerns over energy security, has intensified the interest in direct coal liquefaction (DCL), particularly in countries such as China which is rich in coal resources, but short of petroleum. In addition to a general introduction on the mechanisms and processes of DCL, this paper overviews some recent advances in DCL technology with respect to the influencing factors for DCL reactions (temperature, solvent, pressure, atmospheres, etc.), the effects of coal pre-treatments for DCL (swelling, thermal treatment, hydrothermal treatment, etc.), as well as recent development in multi-staged DCL processes, DCL catalysts and co-liquefaction of coal with biomass. Keywords: direct coal liquefaction (DCL); processes; influencing factors; coal pre-treatment; catalysts; co-liquefaction; biomass 1. Introduction Due to the rapid increase in demand for petroleum and its declining reserves, the concern over energy security has intensified the interest in coal liquefaction, especially for those countries which are short of oil resources but have abundant coal reserves, such as the United States and China, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development
    5th Edition Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______________________________________________________________________________ Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development Prepared by INTEK, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Petroleum Reserves Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves Fifth Edition: September 2011 Note to Readers Regarding the Revised Edition (September 2011) This report was originally prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy in June 2007. The report and its contents have since been revised and updated to reflect changes and progress that have occurred in the domestic oil shale and tar sands industries since the first release and to include profiles of additional companies engaged in oil shale and tar sands resource and technology development. Each of the companies profiled in the original report has been extended the opportunity to update its profile to reflect progress, current activities and future plans. Acknowledgements This report was prepared by INTEK, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Petroleum Reserves, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves (DOE/NPOSR) as a part of the AOC Petroleum Support Services, LLC (AOC- PSS) Contract Number DE-FE0000175 (Task 30). Mr. Khosrow Biglarbigi of INTEK, Inc. served as the Project Manager. AOC-PSS and INTEK, Inc. wish to acknowledge the efforts of representatives of the companies that provided information, drafted revised or reviewed company profiles, or addressed technical issues associated with their companies, technologies, and project efforts. Special recognition is also due to those who directly performed the work on this report. Mr. Peter M. Crawford, Director at INTEK, Inc., served as the principal author of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Verification of Shell GTL Fuel As CARB Alternative Diesel
    Verification of Shell GTL Fuel as CARB Alternative Diesel Ralph A. Cherrillo, Mary Ann Dahlstrom, Anne T. Coleman – Shell Global Solutions (US) Inc. Richard H. Clark – Shell Global Solutions (UK) COPYRIGHT @ 2007 Shell Global Solutions (US) Inc. Outline • Introduction Future Fuel Demand GTL as a Future Fuel • GTL Demonstrations CARB Verification Testing Fleet Tests • GTL Outlook 2 Future Fuel Demand A Forecast of Global Automotive Fuel Demand Energy Demand （x1018 J ） ¾Significant uncertainty in Hydrogen Gaseous plateau of ‘conventional Fuels oil mountain’ 300 Gas Electricity 250 ¾Increased environmental pressures 200 Synthetic fuel and biofuels ¾Plethora of potential 150 Liquid vehicle-fuel solutions Fuels 100 Diesel / Gasoline ¾Common denominator ought to be cost 50 Heavy Oil effectiveness. 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 （Source： a WEC scenario） 3 GTL Fuel –Synthetic and Alternative Fuel GTL Fuel is one class of Synthetic fuels, which refers to liquids from: gas (GTL) coal (CTL) biomass (BTL) waste (WTL) Alternative Fuels comprise synthetic fuels, biofuels, and fuels such as water-fuel emulsions, ethanol-diesel blends 4 What is Gas to Liquids? GTL is a process that converts natural gas to clean fuels and high quality products via the Fischer-Tropsch process CO + 2H2 –(CH2)n – Natural Syngas Syngas Synthesis Hydrocracking • LPG Manufacture Synthesis Hydrocracking Gas Manufacture • Condensate CH4 • Naphtha • Gasoil • Base oils • Chemicals O H2O O22 Shell’s proprietary process: Shell Middle Distillate Synthesis (SMDS) 5 Why -- Shell GTL Fuel ¾ Strategic diversification of energy supply ¾ Compatible with existing infrastructure ¾ GTL provides a bridge to Biomass to Liquids and Coal to Liquids technologies ¾ Life cycle analysis: GTL vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Shale Tracing Federal Support for Oil Shale Development in the U.S
    SUBSIDIZING OIL SHALE TRACING FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR OIL SHALE DEVELOPMENT IN THE U.S. www.taxpayer.net OIL SHALE SPECIMEN. Image Courtesy of United States Geological Survey OIL SHALE SPECIMEN. Image Courtesy of United States Geological Survey lthough the oil shale industry is still in reserves were created to ensure a military oil supply. its commercial infancy, it has a long his- In response, the Bureau of Mines program began A tory of government support that continues research into exploiting oil shale technology and in today. The Bureau of Land Management recently the 1960s private industry followed. But significant issued two new research, development and demon- action was limited until the 1970s, when in response stration leases and new federal regulations for com- to the gas shortages Congress intervened in oil shale mercial leases and royalty rates are expected any day. development, in hopes of creating a domestic fuel Before the federal government goes down that road alternative. Their unsuccessful attempt to spur large- it’s important to take a look back and ask whether we scale commercial development of oil shale and other should be throwing good money after bad. unconventional fossil fuels became a notorious waste Oil shale, or kerogen shale, is a sedimentary rock of federal funds. that contains liquid hydrocarbons that are released Since then federal support has continued in vari- when heated. Considered an oil precursor, kerogen ous forms. Although not a key part of the overall is fossil organic matter that has not had exposure energy policy agenda, federal subsidies continue to to high enough temperatures or been in the ground appear in legislation and administrative actions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of E-Fuels in the Transport System in Europe (2030–2050) (Literature Review)
    A look into the role of e-fuels in the transport system in Europe (2030–2050) (literature review) Introduction As part of Concawe’s Low Carbon Pathways project, this In December 2015, Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change convened article presents a literature in Paris for the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21). The conference was an important step towards review on e-fuels, which aims to addressing the risks posed by climate change through an agreement to keep the global temperature build a better understanding of increase ‘well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels’ and drive efforts to limit it to 1.5°C above pre- e-fuel production technologies industrial levels. To achieve these goals, the European Union (EU) is exploring different mid-century and implications in terms of scenarios leading to a low-carbon EU economy by 2050. efficiency, greenhouse gas reduction, technology readiness level, environmental impact, In line with the EU’s low-emissions strategy, Concawe’s cross-sectoral Low Carbon Pathways (LCP) investment, costs and potential programme is exploring opportunities and challenges presented by different low-carbon technologies to demand. It is a summary of the achieve a significant reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions associated with both the manufacture exhaustive literature review and use of refined products in Europe over the medium (2030) and longer term (2050). which is due to be published by the end of 2019. In the scenarios considered by the Commission (P2X, COMBO, 1.5 TECH and 1.5 LIFE) e-fuels are presented as a potential cost-effective technology that could be used to achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Liquid Coal As a Green Energy: a Review
    International Journal of Engineering and Technical Research (IJETR) ISSN: 2321-0869, Volume-2, Issue-3, March 2014 LIQUID COAL AS A GREEN ENERGY: A REVIEW Saurabh Prakash, Ghanshyam Paswan & Kumar Nikhil offers significant reductions in vehicle emissions such as Abstract— Fuel market is growing more rapidly than the oxides of nitrogen, volatile organic compounds and carbon fuel production of the world. Simultaneously coal to liquid fuel mono- oxide. technology is growing and covers some of the fuel demand of the world. A cost effective technology uses the coal with low carbon value, which is not much useful in its natural form and II. METHODOLOGY the manipulated form leads to the development of liquid coal. Most of process have not been industrialized. The raw gas is The process of liquid coal production is coal to liquid or converted into liquid is an idea along with removal of sulphur, gas to liquid conversion. There are mainly two methods of phosphorous impurities which does not pollutes air so, liquid coal production. ultimately environmentally safe. A. Direct coal liquefaction process. Index terms—Bergius process, fischer- tropsch reactor, B. Indirect coal liquefaction process. liquefaction, liquefied coal, syngas. A. Direct coal liquefaction process: I. INTRODUCTION The direct coal liquefaction processes are hydrogenation Liquid coal is a manipulated component used as a fuel by and carbonisation[3]. the process of liquefaction of coal. Liquid coal is used as an alternative to oil. Coal liquefaction is particularly suited to countries that rely heavily on oil imports and have large a) Hydrogenation: domestic reserve of coal [1]. The basic method of producing Bergius process developed by Friedrich bergius in 1913 , liquid coal is gasification of coal with little oxygen and water is a method for direct conversion of coal to liquid by vapour [2].
    [Show full text]
  • COAL CONFERENCE University of Pittsburgh · Swanson School of Engineering ABSTRACTS BOOKLET
    Thirty-Fifth Annual INTERNATIONAL PITTSBURGH COAL CONFERENCE University of Pittsburgh · Swanson School of Engineering ABSTRACTS BOOKLET Clean Coal-based Energy/Fuels and the Environment October 15-18, 2018 New Century Grand Hotel Xuzhou Hosted by: The conference acknowledges the support of Co-hosted by: K. C. Wong Education Foundation, Hong Kong A NOTE TO THE READER This Abstracts Booklet is prepared solely as a convenient reference for the Conference participants. Abstracts are arranged in a numerical order of the oral and poster sessions as published in the Final Conference Program. In order to facilitate the task for the reader to locate a specific abstract in a given session, each paper is given two numbers: the first designates the session number and the second represents the paper number in that session. For example, Paper No. 25.1 is the first paper to be presented in the Oral Session #25. Similarly, Paper No. P3.1 is the first paper to appear in the Poster Session #3. It should be cautioned that this Abstracts Booklet is prepared based on the original abstracts that were submitted, unless the author noted an abstract change. The contents of the Booklet do not reflect late changes made by the authors for their presentations at the Conference. The reader should consult the Final Conference Program for any such changes. Furthermore, updated and detailed full manuscripts, published in the Conference Proceedings, will be sent to all registered participants following the Conference. On behalf of the Thirty-Fifth Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, we wish to express our sincere appreciation and gratitude to Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for Coal Processing
    Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines COAL PROCESSING WORLD BANK GROUP Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for Coal Processing Introduction such as host country context, assimilative capacity of the environment, and other project factors, are taken into account. The Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines are The applicability of specific technical recommendations should technical reference documents with general and industry- be based on the professional opinion of qualified and specific examples of Good International Industry Practice experienced persons. When host country regulations differ 1 (GIIP) . When one or more members of the World Bank Group from the levels and measures presented in the EHS are involved in a project, these EHS Guidelines are applied as Guidelines, projects are expected to achieve whichever is more required by their respective policies and standards. These stringent. If less stringent levels or measures than those industry sector EHS guidelines are designed to be used provided in these EHS Guidelines are appropriate, in view of together with the General EHS Guidelines document, which specific project circumstances, a full and detailed justification provides guidance to users on common EHS issues potentially for any proposed alternatives is needed as part of the site- applicable to all industry sectors. For complex projects, use of specific environmental assessment. This justification should multiple industry-sector guidelines may be necessary. A demonstrate that the choice for any alternate performance complete list of industry-sector guidelines can be found at: levels is protective of human health and the environment www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/Content/EnvironmentalGuidelines Applicability The EHS Guidelines contain the performance levels and measures that are generally considered to be achievable in The EHS Guidelines for Coal Processing cover the processing new facilities by existing technology at reasonable costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Liquefaction and Desulfurization
    COAL LIQUEFACTION AND DESULFURIZATION J. A. GUIN, Y. A. LIU, C. W. CURTIS, A. R. TARRER AND D. C. WILLIAMS The program is presently the Auburn University largest university-based coal research Auburn, AL 36849 program in the Southeastern region, and current support is . .. about $450,000 annually. ALABAMA IS A SIGNIFICANT producer of coal in the United States, particularly in the Gulf province. There are large reserves of coal in Ala­ aspects of the Auburn coal liquefaction research bama; 35 billion tons lie in the northern and program. It has made available its resources and central counties, enough for hundreds of years at facilities at the 6 tons/day solvent-refined-coal our present rate of production. Lignite deposits (SRC) pilot plant located at Wilsonville, Alabama in southern Alabama counties await the technology (90 miles from Auburn) for support of the super­ to properly realize their value. Thus, a strong vised internship and hands-on research training of recommendation of a statewide conference on the Auburn program. The largest utility coal user "Energy and the Future of Alabama" sponsored in the Northeast, the New England Electric by Auburn University in 1972 was for "research, System, has also actively participated in the Au­ development and technical liaison in the areas of burn coal desulfurization research since 1978. coal production, coal processing and coal usage." Auburn University acted upon this recommenda­ COAL RESEARCH FACULTY AND FACILITIES tion, and with major support from the National The Auburn coal liquefaction research program Science Foundation (NSF), established the Au­ is presently being directed by a number of burn Coal Conversion Research Laboratory in chemical engineering faculty, including Drs.
    [Show full text]