Gasification Technology - Page 4
Introduction | History | Challenges | Benefits | Current Tech | Future Tech | Conclusions
By Scott Miller — February 2011
Gasification Benefits
So if we as a nation decide to go this route, what do we gain? Let’s
take a closer look at this overall proposal and see what the potential
benefits for this project would be. We’re proposing building a total
capacity of 10 million barrels per day of synthetic fuel manufacturing
capability. This would be the equivalent of 250 facilities similar in size
to the Great Plains Synfuels Plant in Beulah ND. Overall, this infrastructure
would consume roughly 1.5 billion tons of coal and biomass per year for
the production of transportation fuels. The total cost to construct this
infrastructure is estimated at approximately $700 billion over a 15 year
period, for an average of less than $50 billion per year.
Economics:
We start by taking over $250 billion annually that we currently send out
of the country to pay for foreign oil, and hand that cash over to US
workers. Construction workers, scientists, engineers, welders, steel
fabricators, farmers
and general laborers
would all get a chunk of the pie. A lot of pipes and other steel will
go into one of these plants. And 1.5 billion tons of feedstock doesn’t
just hop up on its feet and walk itself to the plants. For perspective,
merely operating the gasification plants themselves would require over
150,000 workers
and this doesn’t factor in constructing and maintaining the plants
or getting the feedstocks to the plants.
By using gasification, we can also bring stability to energy prices in general.
In today’s oil markets, rapid fluctuations on the order of 50% or more
are the norm. Shifting fuel and energy prices impact all areas of the economy
and stabilizing this segment will help other industries maintain profitability.
A stable domestic supply of energy at a reasonable price also helps in growing
domestic businesses as it takes some of the risk out of the equation (in
other words, they will always be able to get their goods to market for a
reasonable cost).
Where this is especially important is with the projected growth in demand
for transportation fuels for China and India as these nations continue to
modernize. The population of each of those nations is three times the United
States so the overall potential demand for fuel there is enormous. It simply
isn’t reasonable to believe that third parties can continue to meet
the demands of all three nations as China and India progress. This means
that either price will skyrocket for transportation fuels or major conflicts
will occur between these nations. This proposal is the equivalent of adding
a permanent, renewable Saudi Arabia to the mix – one with a never ending
supply of fuel.
National Security:
While many are unwilling to state it outright, a very large portion of our
current national defense expenditures are for the purpose of keeping
conventional oil flowing globally. This should not be perceived in any manner
as a commentary
on the US Armed Forces; I’m merely stating a fact regarding the strategic
planning used for designing and equipping our military. And I’m not
going to ask you to take my word for it. A comprehensive study by the
RAND corporation (arguably the largest think tank focused on defense issues
today)
openly admits that at least $90 billion per year is being spent solely
on “Protecting
the Global Flow of Oil” when one combines the structural costs of
the forces and the average operational costs of those units. And before scoffing
at that number, know
that the enormous
costs of Operation Iraqi Freedom were not included in their calculations – they
instead used the operational costs of the twenty years prior to the
beginning of OIF in 2003.
Imported
Oil and U.S. National Security
size: 1.25 Mb - 127 pages
Operations in Afghanistan alone are averaging over $40 billion per year
as of 2011. To date, over $1trillion has already been spent on the Global
War on Terror and there is currently no reasonable end in sight. For
a nation
that already has over $14 trillion in federal debt and is running an
annual
deficit over $1trillion, this level of military spending cannot continue
for long. Whether anyone likes it or not, US operations in the Middle
East will come to an end; either through our choosing to end the wars
or through
national bankruptcy.
The Cost of War on Terror Operations Since 9/11
size: 560 kb - 57 pages
Developing this gasification infrastructure will give the United States
the option of walking away from the Middle East should it choose to
do so without negatively impacting the economy. Moreover, it would
help in preventing
any future potential conflict with China or any other nation over access
to petroleum. While many would call this abandonment of national responsibility,
the reality is that most Middle East oil does not come to the United
States. Given the fact that the United States collectively is by far
the largest
consumer of fuels in the world, one could also state that it should
be a national responsibility to provide more of these fuels to the
markets.
Environment:
According to EPA estimates for 2008, the aggregate total of waste generated
by the people and industries of the United States was a bit over 8 billion
tons. Over 7.5 billion tons came from industry while the remainder comes
from a variety of sources. Most of the metallic wastes can be recycled but
this still leaves large amounts of plastics, wood, paper, cardboard and various
other materials suitable for gasification. Municipal trash alone is estimated
at around 500 million tons per year.
Currently, a lot of this material goes to landfills where it is buried and
left to decay over time. While there is nothing inherently wrong with this
process, as little as 10% of this overall supply of waste would be sufficient
to meet 50% of the feedstock requirements of the proposed gasification infrastructure.
Conveniently, a number of states, such as New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts,
Connecticut, California and Florida are already transporting portions of
their wastes to other states due to lack of adequate landfill space or other
environmental issues. With transportation already built into their waste
management systems, these areas are excellent candidates for gasification
facilities.
Moreover, gasification is especially valuable in the destruction and management
of biohazardous materials and wastes. These materials are typically incinerated
to destroy the hazards but gasification would allow reuse of the elements
of the materials while still destroying the hazardous portions. Here again,
special collection and transportation methods are already in place for this
waste stream so converting to gasification here where adequate quantities
are available should be more economical.
Introduction | History | Challenges | Benefits | Current Tech | Future Tech | Conclusions
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
|