Energy Central EnergyPulse Home
Home Subscribe Login Contribute to Energy Pulse Advertise on Energy Pulse About Energy Pulse Feedback to Energy Pulse
Search Articles:   
  You are here: Home > Article Display


Free Newsletter
Sign up today for your free subscription to the EnergyPulse Weekly Update - delivered directly to your e-mail box.
e-mail:


 

Securing the Grid

Thursday Jun 20, 2013 - 12:00 PM Eastern - Virtual Event

Grid threats increase daily - from foreign foes, terrorists, criminals and hackers. Utilities are tasked with guarding against a rising tide of potentially disruptive intrusions into their power grid and electronic networks. What will it take to keep the power more...

Waste Conversion Congress East Coast

Monday Jun 17, 2013 - Tuesday Jun 18, 2013 - Boston, Massachusetts - USA

Deliver a profitable and operational waste conversion project by securing finance, feedstock and approval more...

Data Informed's Marketing Analytics and Customer Engagement

Monday Jun 24, 2013 - Tuesday Jun 25, 2013 - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - USA

Data InformedĀ“s Marketing Analytics and Customer Engagement provides marketing, sales, and customer support managers with the information they need to create an effective data-driven customer strategy. more...


 OR 


We know you have something to say!
There is an immediate need for articles on the hot topics in the Power Industry! EnergyPulse, like no other publication, also provides a means for our readers to immediately interact with experts like you.
 
Contribute Today!
Please view our Author Guidelines and send submissions to the editor.

 
Liquid Coal As a Transportation Fuel
6.8.06   Harry Valentine, Commentator/Energy Researcher, Langson Energy

Article Viewed 1293 Times
14 Comments
 
  • Email This Author
  • Comment On Article
  • About The Author
  • More Articles By This Author

    Solid coal was one of the early transportation fuels to be used in self-powered ships, in the railway industry as well as in some early steam-powered road transport vehicles. The commercial transportation industry gradually underwent the transition from solid fuel to liquid fuel. The coal industry eventually developed a combustible liquid coal fuel that had several advantages over solid fuel in certain applications. Most coal-water fuels were developed from coal that had low sulfur content. There are varieties of coal-water fuel such as orimulsion from Venezuela that have to be mixed with 5% crude oil to maintain combustion when being used in thermal power stations.

    A range of other low-rank coal-water fuels that are being developed includes a variety from Alaska that can sustain combustion without need for additional oil. Most coal-water fuels will burn cleanly in steady state, external-combustion applications such as boiler fuel. Some coal-water fuels will burn in internal-combustion engines except that the use of such fuel in such engines became problematic. Gas turbine engines that were run on coal-water fuel had carbon deposits form on turbine blades. Similar carbon deposits appeared on the piston rings and valves of diesel engines that were also run on coal-water fuel.

    Coal Combustor Technology

    Research has been undertaken at the University of Pennsylvania that involves a specialized combustor for coal. The combustor is still under development and promises to solve the carbon deposit problem that results from burning powdered coal in internal-combustion (gas) turbine engines. The combustor can apparently be modified to burn coal-water fuel in gas turbine engines. Gas turbine engines need to rotate at maximum RPM with turbine inlet temperature at maximum in order to operate at peak efficiency.

    The coal combustor is being developed for use in high-powered, internal-combustion turbine engines such as those found in thermal power stations. Bladed turbine engines are generally unsuitable for low-powered (under 500-Hp) applications, however, an alternate engine is under development. The "Star Rotor" turbine is positive-displacement Brayton-cycle engine that is based on the layout of a gerotor gear pump and is presently under development at A&M University of Texas. The coal combustor engine could be adapted for use on the Star Rotor engine. The projected performance of this engine would be better suited for commercial road transportation applications.

    The positive-displacement turbine of the star rotor enables it to deliver power efficiently over a wide range of engine speed. The positive-displacement compressor can deliver enough air to the combustion chamber over a wide range of engine speed to maintain an optimal turbine inlet temperature. Power output of the star rotor will vary with engine speed. This engine will need to drive through either a multi-speed gearbox (manual, automatic or automated) or electrical transmission in order to deliver optimal performance in commercial transportation. A liquid coal fueled version of the star rotor engine could be used in the commercial transportation industry depending on how (market-driven) fuel prices evolve over the long-term future.

    Coal Fuel Economics

    If world oil prices remain high (over $50-per barrel) over the long-term future, there may be some economic gain in the development of alternate fuels such as coal-water fuel and engines such as the star rotor. The mass produced cost of coal-water fuel is estimated at near $20 per barrel, however, it has lower heating value (7000 to 9000-BTU/lb) than diesel fuel or gasoline. A long-term, market-driven price differential between these fuels would be the only way by which to develop coal-water fuel for the commercial transportation industry. Such a fuel may be introduced to transportation companies in selected regions where vehicles are used in local services and may be re-fueled at a limited number of stations. Alternate fuel such as coal-water fuel may be used in a range of external-combustion engines that are presently being developed.

    Thermo-acoustic Engines

    One type of such engine is the "thermo-acoustic" engine that converts heat energy to low-frequency sound waves that in turn drives a linear alternator. These engines could be built in modules of 50-Kw or 100-Kw each and could operate at comparable efficiency to the best diesel engines in present use. That thermo-acoustic engines convert heat to electricity at high efficiency will enable them to recharge onboard batteries that are used for energy storage in a range of hybrid vehicles. These vehicles will include municipal transport hybrid buses, hybrid taxis, hybrid trucks that are used in local service as well as in hybrid railway locomotives that are used as shunters or used to haul commuter trains.

    The performance and efficiency of such hybrid vehicles can be improved by the use of ultra-capacitors. These solid-state devices can outperform batteries insofar as rapidly absorbing and discharging large amounts of electrical energy. Their use in battery-powered and in hybrid vehicles can greatly improve acceleration, recover energy during deceleration, reduce overall energy consumption and greatly extend the life expectancy of storage batteries and the engines that recharge them. Electrically powered drag racing cars in the USA are using ultra-capacitors for energy storage.

    External-combustion Piston Engine

    The Proeschel group of Ohio has developed and patented an annular design of heat exchanger that offers effectiveness levels in the range of 90-percent. This group has incorporated their unique heat exchanger design in experiments that involve a modified Ericsson-cycle, external-combustion piston engine. The coal combustor technology from University of Pennsylvania could be used in such an application to assure clean exhaust emissions.

    The Proeschel-modified Ericsson-cycle engine could drive electrical generation equipment in a hybrid vehicle or drive through a multi-speed transmission. It could theoretically approach the thermal efficiency of a diesel engine while burning a coal-water fuel. The power output of the Proeschel engine would be considerably less than that of a gas turbine engine. It seems aimed at a market niche where low-powered gas turbine engines would operate at very low thermal efficiency. The market niche for the Proeschel-modified engine in the commercial transportation industry would be hybrid municipal buses, hybrid taxis and possibly hybrid shunting locomotives.

    Limited Intercity Transportation

    Relative future fuel prices will determine the acceptance of coal-water fuel as a commercial transportation fuel. If the fuel gains acceptance in several nearby cities as a fuel for local transportation, the infrastructure that would evolve could support a limited amount of intercity transportation. Intercity commercial transportation would require the use of engines that will have higher power output than engines used in local and municipal operation. Road vehicles would use multi-speed automatic (automated) or manual transmissions whereas railway transportation would use electrical transmission systems. The external-combustion Ericsson-cycle engine from the Proeschel group and the internal-combustion version of the Star Rotor engine would be prime candidates for road-based, intercity commercial transportation. The Star Rotor could also be adapted to operate as an external-combustion engine.

    External-combustion Turbines

    The success of a coal-fueled Star Rotor engine would depend on the long-term performance of the specialized combustor from University of Pennsylvania. As an option, it could be adapted for operation in external combustion engines. A single-shaft Star Rotor could include a part-load combustion fan (with variable-pitch blading) that could supply additional air into the combustion chamber to maintain optimal turbine inlet temperature during part-load operation. Most of the air that would otherwise enter the combustion chamber in an external-combustion version of the Star Rotor engine would be fresh, hot uncombusted exhaust air from the turbine. An external-combustion Star Rotor operating on coal-water fuel could see service in railway traction service as well as in the commercial intercity road transportation industry.

    The performance and efficiency of external-combustion engines will depend on the performance of the heat exchangers. The Proeschel annular heat exchanger design can be made from any a variety of several highly specialized, high-temperature alloy steels. The use of high-temperature heat exchangers and recouperators would assure that external-combustion engines would operate at high thermal efficiency. A competing heat exchanger to the Proeschel design would be the rotating Ljungstrom unit. It offers comparable effectiveness, rotates at low speed (3-RPM) and has successfully been used as a recouperator to improve thermal efficiency in gas turbine engines. Kyocera America offers several types of silicon-nitride that can be used for heating elements in a Ljungstrom heat exchanger. One variety of silicon-nitride has a thermal shock resistance of 750-degrees F and a peak operating temperature of 2500-degrees F.

    Heating elements made from this version of silicon-nitride could be arranged in series in a rotating Lungstrom heat exchanger so as to spread the thermal shock load over several elements in a Lungstrom heat exchanger and extend the service life of the unit. The combination of high heat capability and high thermal shock tolerance in the heat exchanger could raise thermal efficiency in external-combustion turbine engines. The efficiency of so-equipped external-combustion turbine engines could approach the efficiency levels of internal-combustion turbine engines. The part-load efficiency of the external-combustion engines could further be assured by using a fan to pump additional air into the combustion chamber during part-load operation.

    External-combustion turbine engines that are of bladed design or positive-displacement design could operate on coal-water fuel and be used in railway motive service. Smaller versions of the positive-displacement Star Rotor engine and the competing Proeschel-modified Ericsson-cycle engine would be more appropriate for use in road commercial transportation services. The hot exhaust from external-combustion coal-fueled engines could be used to drive bottom-cycle engines to improve efficiency.

    Bottom-cycle Engines

    The energy source for bottom-cycle engines is typically all or part of the heat that is rejected by a high-powered top-cycle engine. Top-cycle engines that operate on coal-water fuel could return thermal efficiency levels of 20% (combustion at 1400-degrees F) to over 30% (combustion over 2000-degrees F). There are two types of engines that can operate as bottom-cycle engines to external-combustion engines that operate on coal-water fuel. One type of engine would be a battery of thermo-acoustic engines while the other type of engine would be a steam engine. BMW is presently testing a steam engine as a bottom-cycle engine in automotive applications.

    A thermo-acoustic engine would convert the exhaust heat to sound waves and then to electricity. Optimal bottom-cycle engine performance would be attained when the commercial vehicle is operating is sustained high-power operation, such as intercity operation. An electric motor would need to be added to the vehicle drivetrain if it is not so equipped. External-combustion turbine engines that operate at 20%-efficiency on coal-water fuel could have exhaust temperatures at 600-degrees F.

    A bottom-cycle thermo-acoustic engine could operate at 28%-efficiency on this heat and the overall combined efficiency of the compound system could exceed 40%. A high-temperature, external-combustion turbine engine could operate at 32%-efficiency with an exhaust temperature of over 1000-degrees F. The bottom-cycle thermo-acoustic engine could operate at 35%-efficiency and the compound system could operate at an efficiency of over 50%.

    Recent developments in small-scale steam power technology have revolved around the use of super-critical steam where pressure exceeds 3210-psia. The Enginion group of Germany and Cyclone Power in the USA are among the leading companies in the development of super-critical steam engines. In 2002, Enginion installed a single-acting, uniflow steam engine (inlet injectors, exhaust valves) into a Skoda (Volkswagen) automobile. The engine used steam at extreme high pressure (4000-psia) and high temperature (1200-deg F). It delivered the thermal efficiency of a diesel engine (40%).

    Steam Bottom-cycle Engine

    An external-combustion turbine engine that operates at over 30%-efficiency will have enough heat in the exhaust (1000-deg F) to boil water and raise saturated steam. The use of a conventional steam engine as a bottom-cycle engine could raise the combined thermal efficiency to over 44%. The heat in the exhaust would be sufficient to preheat the water for a super-critical steam engine and the combined efficiency could approach a level of 50%. Super-critical steam engines use coil-monotube boilers and may be better suited as bottom-cycle engines in on-road commercial operation. A super-critical steam engine could also operate as the main engine in a commercial road vehicle that runs on coal-water fuel.

    Railway companies may be willing to consider a testing a locomotive that uses an external-combustion turbine that operates on coal-water fuel. They may even be willing to consider using a conventional steam engine as a bottom-cycle engine if the problems that pertain to the operation of such an engine can be resolved. The exhaust heat from the turbine engine may be sufficient to generate saturated steam. A small amount of extra fuel would have to be burnt to convert the saturated steam to superheated steam that can be expanded in a (positive-displacement) steam engine. The overall combined efficiency of a turbine (32%) with steam (20%) could exceed 40%.

    Conclusion

    Coal-water fuel can be processed from an extensive supply of low-rank (low sulphur content) coal that can be found in Alaska and in Alberta. Coal-water fuel can be used a feedstock for plants that produce synthetic fuel from coal and its byproducts via the Fischer-Tropsch process. The process consumes energy and manpower and ultimately raises the price of the final product. There are several types of external-combustion engines that are under development and that can operate efficiently on coal-water fuel.

    They may be able to do so at lower cost and at comparable efficiency to internal-combustion engines that will operate on synthetic fuel that was processed from coal-water fuel. There may be cost-savings and efficiency gains to be realized from burning coal-water fuel directly in external-combustion engines. The North American trucking industry has suffered economically due to the escalating cost of (imported) diesel fuel. If world oil prices remain high over the long-term future, a truck equipped with an external-combustion engine operating on coal-water fuel could incur substantially lower fuel costs that a diesel-fuel competitor.

    For information on purchasing reprints of this article, contact sales.
    Copyright 2013 CyberTech, Inc.
     
    Contact The Author
    Email the author
     
  • Click Here For More Articles on Fossil & Biomass


  • Click Here For More Articles By Harry Valentine
  • Do you agree or disagree with this article? Send in your own article.

     

    Readers Comments

    Date Comment
    Len Gould
    6.8.06
    I cringe at the thought of operating a coal-water fueled steam engine through a northern winter. (ouch)

    Todd McKissick
    6.9.06
    I'm curious of the other qualities of this process. What are the emissions of coal-water like? With the problem of carbon coating turbine blades, that pretty much says it's not the cleanest energy source, doesn't it? What would the energy costs be to convert this into a 'clean' coal-water process?

    Also, how would a Stirling external combustion engine do under these conditions. The temperatures of the top-cycle seem plenty high enough to support one with good efficiencies resulting.

    Graham Honor
    6.11.06
    As oil and NG are expected to be all but abundant in the second half of the 21st century, liquefied coal is a step in the right direction as long as renewable technologies (solar, geothermal etc.) would receive the most resources, our grandchildren and their grandchildren would thank us for that.

    Len Gould
    6.13.06
    Actually Todd's suggestion resolves two big issues (at least). Using a Stirling engine instead of a Rankine steamer eliminates concerns of working fluid freezup in cold weather. And its possible that pre-gasifying the coal-water fuel in a small onboard water-gas shift reactor would enable the resulting fuel to burn cleanly enough to be used at least in an external combustion engine, eg. pre-separating out abrasive and adhesive mineral ashes. Would diluting the water with enough ethanol to provide "anti-freezing" affect things? Maybe not.

    Roger Arnold
    6.13.06
    Powdered coal as fuel for combustion turbine engines has been tried before. It failed, due to wear problems caused by ash in the exhaust stream. I don't see how a slurry of powdered coal in water would be any different. And as far as external combustion is concerned, the presence of water in the fuel only saps energy. The heat that goes into vaporizing water at atmospheric pressure can't be recovered at a useful temperature.

    If there's something new going on here, I'd love to hear about it. But there's nothing in the article to suggest it.

    There is a pre-combustion clean-up process I've heard of that eliminates ash. The treated coal could very well be suited for use in combustion turbines. In that case the presence of water would be beneficial. But the clean-up process basically consists of disolving the ash content in hydroflouric acid. Recycling the reagents is a costly and energy-intensive process. I believe it roughly doubles the cost of the coal. But I have no idea if pre-combustion cleanup plays any part in what this article is talking about.

    More information, please, Harry. There's not enough here to mean anything.

    Roger Arnold
    6.13.06
    P.S. - AFAIK, there's no coal in Orimulsion. Heavy oil and bitumen, an emulsifier, and water. It's burned in power plants in lieu of coal or fuel oil, but I've never heard that there was powered coal mixed in it.

    Todd McKissick
    6.13.06
    One benefit to burning coal-water in an external combustion engine is the potential of a mechanical scraper/cleaner to maintain good heat exchange. Since the premise is use for transportation, we are dealing with running cycles of 5 minutes to 4 hours. This should allow for some process of cyclic cleaning and/or coating of the heated surfaces on shutdown. This could even be coating it with Len's ethanol suggestion, just in a cyclic fashion rather than continuous.

    If memory serves, isn't the Star-rotor a non-contact close tolerance gerotor turbine? If so, would the soot actually cause much wear? Maybe the above cyclic soaking process could be added here as well.

    Another option might be to not use water for the coal fluid in the first place. What if some other fuel such as ethanol was used? Possibly this could even be used in the initial "cleaning" stage or just later used to displace the water for transport, I don't know which is better. This would allow transporting the coal via pipeline and the ethanol gets to tag along in the same process. Either fuel could be partially extracted from the mix cheaply at the end if desired or it could be burned as a coal-ethanol mix with inherant solvent properties and higher energy content than straight ethanol. It should eliminate the heat lost to vaporization issue that Roger brings up as well as the energy required to transport all the wasted/useless water. It would also preserve a large amount of water that's already in short supply.

    Anybody have any idea of what happens when you mix powdered coal with ethanol? Hopefully, they don't cancel each other out and make jello or something benign. :)

    Len Gould
    6.13.06
    Actually, I was suggesting the use of a gassifier process in front of the engine with a water-shift reaction, which would convert the coal + water into hydrogen + carbon monoxide, both valuable fuel gasses. If the ash was then trapped out immediately after the gassifier reaction chamber, then a completely ash-free carbon-free fuel stream can be fed into the engine. Having eg. 10% ethanol, 45% water and 45% coal should result in a fuel mix that wouldn't freeze, though it'll need stiring, and the ethanol should come out of the gasifier with the same energy content that went in.

    No doubt some problems might arise in developing such a small gassifier / ash separator, but the technology is pretty much all already developed for the IGCC coal-fired clean-coal stations which have done several long test runs and are now being considered in several commercial sites.

    Len Gould
    6.13.06
    Now if only somebody could figure out a way to cheaply and efficiently separate oxygen from air, we could design an oxy-blown gassifier that could condense it's exhaust, re-cycle the water, and deliver the CO2 back to the fuel station for sequestering. 9<}

    Jack Moody
    6.13.06
    I enjoyed the roundup of coal water engine technologies that are out there and working. I would like to add that Mississippi has over 5 billion tons of low sulphur lignite which appears suitable for coal water fuels as well as gasification applications. Mississippi also has a large and growing CO2 sequestration infrastructure which would be a nice complement to a gasification plant. Y'all come and see us.

    Hans Nicolaisen
    6.13.06
    From Harry's article -

    " The mass produced cost of coal-water fuel is estimated at near $20 per barrel, however, it has lower heating value (7000 to 9000-BTU/lb) than diesel fuel or gasoline."

    This is no criticism of Harry, but I hope that one of these days a uniform standard of energy per unit will be developed. In this case, while I know that gasoline contains about 125,000 btu/gallon, and diesel 139,000 btu/gallon - I have no idea (off the top of my head) how much either fuel weighs per gallon. I could find the specific gravity of each and do the neccessary calculations. But, I'd rather not.

    This is a problem that crops up frequently. For instance, should we think in barrels of oil, or tons of oil? Should we think in joules, or btu's? Vaclav Smil's book, "Energy at the Crossroads" is a fine example of how confusing this can be. He jumps all over the place and never does have standards of measurement. In one chapter he acknowledges that he will use the "old standard" of barrels of oil, then on the next page shows a graph in tons of oil.

    If we are to expect people to better understand our energy situation, uniform standards of measurement would help.

    Sorry for the rant. It's something that's been on my mind for awhile.

    Len Gould
    6.14.06
    Hans: "0.444 - 0.646 tonnes of oil equivalent per tonne, energy density of coal" is quoted at http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/JuliyaFisher.shtml for coal which contains 18 - 27 MJ/kg which appears to be slightly above median. Quick estimating then puts pure coal "loose in pile" at perhaps 50% of oil energy content by weight, somewhat less for a water mix.

    Joseph Somsel
    6.14.06
    This was a useful article!

    The critical issue in energy polcy today is liquid transportation fuels. With petroleum production possibly peaking, the major use for which we have the most trouble finding a substitute is liquid transportation fuels. Hence all the noise about ethanol.

    This article reminds us that we will more than likely have to accept some compromises as substitutes gain market share. Howver, to date, coal-water fuel doesn't look like an easy and completely satisfactory substitute for cars and expecially aviation.

    More work is strongly recommended.

    Rodney Adams
    6.25.06
    There is an alternative way to turn coal into liquid fuel that avoids many of the research obstacles noted in the article. There are two known processes that chemically add hydrogen to coal (which is mostly carbon) to produce a synthetic hydrocarbon that has essentially the same chemical quality as normal diesel or jet fuel.

    Though this process may require a bit more investment at the conversion site than would a coal-water production facility, the resulting product would fit into the existing infrastructure without modification. It would alleviate worries about engine developments and would be cheaper to ship per unit energy.

    You can find out more at www.liquidcoal.com

    Rod Adams

    Add your comments:
    Please log in to leave a comment!

    Top

    Sponsored Content
        Home | Register | Subscribe | Contribute | Advertise | About Us | Feedback
       Copyright © 2002-2013, CyberTech, Inc. - All rights reserved. Read our Terms of Service.