Coal gasification, costs

Although the rapid cost increases and shortages of petroleum-based feedstocks forecast a decade ago have yet to materialize, shift to natural gas or coal may become necessary in the new century. Under such conditions, it is possible that acrylate manufacture via acetylene, as described above, could again become attractive. It appears that condensation of formaldehyde with acetic acid might be preferred. A coal gasification complex readily provides all of the necessary intermediates for manufacture of acrylates (92). 

The high cost of coal handling and preparation and treatment of effluents, compounded by continuing low prices for cmde oil and natural gas, has precluded significant exploitation of coal as a feedstock for methanol. A small amount of methanol is made from coal in South Africa for local strategic reasons. Tennessee Eastman operates a 195,000-t/yr methanol plant in Tennessee based on the Texaco coal gasification process to make the methyl acetate intermediate for acetic anhydride production (15). 

Capital costs which foUow the same trend as energy consumption, can be about 1.5 to 2.0 times for partial oxidation and coal gasification, respectively, that for natural gas reforming (41). A naphtha reforming plant would cost about 15—20% more than one based on natural gas because of the requirement for hydrotreatiag faciUties and a larger front-end needed for carbon dioxide removal. 

In Lurgi coal gasification, an example of extremely important treating is in the sulfur removal step ahead of methanation where the catalyst is poisoned by even small traces of any sulfur compound. The sulfur removal step is a relatively high capital and operating cost item. 

As an example of this technique, the estimated equipment costs for a large coal gasification project have been correlated and programmed for a computer. Thus, it is vei7 easy to get the cost of any one piece, or of many pieces of equipment, for a coal gasification or hydrocarbon processing project once the specification sheets are completed. 

This section discusses some of the items considered in the start-up costs for a coal gasification project, along with the methods of estimating each item. 

Because fuel costs are high, the search is on for processes with higher thermal efficiency and for ways to improve efficiencies of existing processes. One process being emphasized for its high efficiency is the gas turbine combined cycle. The gas turbine exhaust heat makes steam in a waste heat boiler. The steam drives turbines, often used as lielper turbines. References 1, 2, and 3 treat this subject and mention alternate equipment hookups, some in conjunction with coal gasification plants. 

In all coal gasification processes—yesterday s, today s or tomorrow s —an excessive quantity of carbon monoxide is produced. This must be reduced to near zero in order to meet market requirements—safety, interchangeability with natural gas, and lowest delivered cost to distant markets. 

Most of the hydrogen for synthesis of ammonia is derived from oil or natural gas however, a number of cost-effective coal gasification installations have been commissioned in Asia, North America, and Eastern Europe where oil or natural gas is not available and where coal is abundant. 

Coalcon A coal gasification process using a fluidized bed operated with hydrogen. Developed by Union Carbide Corporation and the Chemical Construction Company, based on work on liquid-phase hydrogenation completed by Union Carbide in the 1950s. A 20-ton per day pilot plant was operated in the 1960s, but a planned larger demonstration plant was abandoned because of cost. 

When methanol is made from natural gas, the gas reacts with steam to produce synthesis gas, a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. This then reacts with a catalytic substance at high temperatures and pressures to produce methanol. The process is similar when methanol is produced by the gasification of biomass. The production of methanol from biomass or coal can cost almost twice as much as production from natural gas. 

Biomass may be a low cost renewable source of hydrogen in the near future. It could be a major renewable source of hydrogen. Biomass can be gasified and converted into hydrogen and electric power. The process is similar to coal gasification. 

The (additional) costs of C02 capture in connection with hydrogen production from natural gas or coal are mainly the costs for C02 drying and compression, as the hydrogen production process necessitates a separation of C02 and hydrogen anyway (even if the C02 is not captured). Total investments increase by about 5%-10% for coal gasification plants and 20%-35% for large steam-methane reformers (see also Chapter 10). 

---