Exploiting China's Coal While It's Still Underground  

Posted by Big Gav in , , , , , , ,

Technology Review has an article on interest in underground coal gasification in China - Exploiting China's Coal While It's Still Underground.

China is pushing forward with a new strategy for expanding access to coal energy that could also reduce its environmental impact: turning coal into clean-burning gases in the ground.

At a U.K.-Chinese summit in Beijing late last month that included British prime minister David Cameron and Chinese premier Wen Jiabao, a $1.5-billion commercial partnership was launched to gasify six million tons of buried coal per year and generate 1,000 megawatts of power.

The project in Inner Mongolia's Yi He coal field is being advanced by the state-owned China Energy Conservation and Environmental Protection Group, and U.K.-based Seamwell International, a newly formed developer of underground coal gasification (UCG) technology. It is the most high-profile of several such proposed projects in China. More than a dozen similar large-scale projects are under development in other countries, including the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Hungary.

UCG is promoted as a relatively clean method of exploiting coal seams that are too deep or thin to be tapped economically using conventional mining. Such seams in Inner Mongolia hold an estimated 280 billion tons, according to Seamwell. That's more than double the tonnage of recoverable coal in China recognized by the London-based World Energy Council. UCG can also generate electricity from coal with less air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and water consumption than existing coal-fired power plants.

What remains to be proven, however, is whether UCG can operate at large scale without contaminating groundwater. Last week, Australian regulators laid charges against Melbourne-based UCG developer Cougar Energy for allegedly contaminating groundwater, and there are signs that this is a rising concern for Chinese regulators.

The chemistry of UCG-based power generation is akin to that of gasification power plants, such as the 250-megawatt GreenGen projected expected to start up late this year in Tianjin, China, in which heat and pressure turn coal into a combustible mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen known as syngas. UCG exploits drilling technology to engineer the coal seam itself into an underground gasification reactor. Wells drilled into the coal seam supply air or oxygen, and sometimes steam, to burn some of the coal, and generate heat and pressure to gasify more coal, and then deliver the resulting syngas to the surface.

China's largest pilot project suggests that UCG will be economically competitive, according to data presented this spring by Beijing-based energy giant ENN. Feng Chen, ENN's chief engineer for UCG, reported on 26 months of gasification at a CAN$1 billion ($155 million) UCG operation at Ulanchap, Inner Mongolia, which generates five megawatts of power. He projected that UCG can supply power 27 percent cheaper than plants such as GreenGen that gasify coal above-ground.

The SMH has an update from Richard Hemming on the progress of UCG in Australia - Small company thinking big on coal.
Small companies must think big, but I have never come across one that is thinking any bigger than oil and gas explorer Central Petroleum.

Last month, the company announced it would look for partners to convert a deep underground coal discovery into synthetic gas and then into synthetic oil. Its announcement in June said that if it was successful it would “help Australia become self-sufficient in liquid transport fuels, a national security imperative”. It also said “Australia could indeed become an exporter of liquid fuels”.

Using underground coal gasification (UCG) technology, Central Petroleum said that in five to six years it wanted to be in a joint venture that produces 60,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day, and then ramp that up to 3 million barrels a day. The proposed mine life would be (wait for it) 150 years – and all for a cost of $7.5 billion. Not much when you consider that, before costs, the ramped-up production rate would rake in more than $47 billion a year at the current oil price.

In the next five years Australia's oil import bill is expected to almost double from $16 billion to $30 billion, so it's possible Australia's many politicians and economists will be following this company's progress. Amazing stuff.

Let's look at where Central Petroleum (ASX: CTP) is today. Since it listed in 2006, this is a company that has constantly run out of money and now has almost a billion shares on issue. At 6 cents, its market cap is $61 million and it holds under $10 million in cash.

The company issues about two ASX announcements a week with more geological references than 99.9 per cent of punters' minds can handle. But it also happens to own the exploration rights over a massive amount of land in the centre of Australia - in the vicinity of 270,000 square kilometres.

While exploring, it stumbled onto an extraordinary amount of coal, which it thinks is in the region of 150 to 300 billion tonnes. The catch is it sits 150 metres or so under the ground.

This is the kind of find that represents zero value to many because of its depth. But a newly formed group called Allied Resource Partners, run by ex-mining engineer-fund manager-Fat Prophets director David Shearwood, thinks otherwise. His firm has been engaged by Central to take charge of the project, which means finding the money ($300 million for a bank feasibility study and then $7.5 billion for the stage 1 development).

There are many risks in this process, but from Central's perspective, there are not many. It is simply granting a sort of “free option” on an asset that the market currently views as worth nothing. ...

Proponents of underground coal gasification cite its successful use in Uzbekistan and Chinchilla, Queensland by ASX listed Linc Energy (LNC), which has a market cap of $1.4 billion.

Historically, it has been used by groups cut off from oil supply, namely the Nazis in Germany and Apartheid South Africa. In these situations, the coal was liquefied after it was dug out of the ground.

These days, some (probably investors in the technology) are describing it as the next big thing in energy because there is no physical mining of coal, which reduces personnel, costs and the physical impact on the landscape. In short, it seems to tick a lot of environmental boxes and can be used for power generation, as well as chemical feed and liquid fuel.

In reality, the conversion of what could be described as a marginal coal deposit into gas, let alone a liquid form, is a “holy grail” for gas companies, according to Johan Hedstrom, an energy analyst with Bell Potter. “It's a nice concept, but has not been commercially proven,” he said.

Hedstrom said that there are specific conditions that need to be in place that cannot be controlled to make synthetic gas. That means the right mix of methane, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide. Clearly it is not a simple process.

This month, Queensland's Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) laid charges against Cougar Energy (ASX: CXY) after a gas well ruptured at a site south of Kingaroy where the company was trialling UCG technology. The company is alleged to have contaminated the ground water.

Cougar's shares now trade at less than 2 cents, having traded at 8 cents 12 months ago.

One small cap that has also been suffering a big decline in value is Carbon Energy (ASX: CNX) whose UCG operations in Australia are located in Queensland's Surat basin. At 23 cents its shares have declined almost 40 per cent in the past six months. Possibly its decline is more a reflection of being lumped in with Cougar.

But this company's prospects seem considerably brighter. Carbon Energy has survived an eight month investigation into its processes and its UCG plant has been running for three months. The company believes that its plant will be connected to the power grid by October (after several delays), which means it will be able to start generating revenues.

Bell Potter's valuation of 66 cents reflects that it is new technology, but also Carbon Energy's potential, which is what you are looking for in a small cap. It has six operations – one in Australia, one in Chile, two in the US, one in India and one in Turkey.


Post a Comment


Locations of visitors to this page

blogspot visitor
Stat Counter

Total Pageviews




Blog Archive


australia (618) global warming (423) solar power (397) peak oil (354) renewable energy (302) electric vehicles (250) wind power (194) ocean energy (165) csp (159) solar thermal power (145) geothermal energy (144) energy storage (142) smart grids (140) oil (138) solar pv (138) tidal power (137) coal seam gas (131) nuclear power (129) china (120) lng (116) iraq (113) geothermal power (112) green buildings (111) natural gas (110) agriculture (92) oil price (80) biofuel (78) wave power (73) smart meters (72) coal (70) uk (69) electricity grid (67) energy efficiency (64) google (58) bicycle (51) internet (51) surveillance (50) big brother (49) shale gas (49) food prices (48) tesla (46) thin film solar (42) biomimicry (40) canada (40) scotland (38) ocean power (37) politics (37) shale oil (37) new zealand (35) air transport (34) algae (34) water (34) arctic ice (33) concentrating solar power (33) queensland (32) saudi arabia (32) california (31) credit crunch (31) bioplastic (30) offshore wind power (30) population (30) cogeneration (28) geoengineering (28) batteries (26) drought (26) resource wars (26) woodside (26) bruce sterling (25) censorship (25) cleantech (25) ctl (23) limits to growth (23) carbon tax (22) economics (22) exxon (22) lithium (22) buckminster fuller (21) distributed manufacturing (21) iraq oil law (21) coal to liquids (20) indonesia (20) origin energy (20) brightsource (19) rail transport (19) ultracapacitor (19) santos (18) ausra (17) collapse (17) electric bikes (17) michael klare (17) atlantis (16) cellulosic ethanol (16) iceland (16) lithium ion batteries (16) mapping (16) ucg (16) bees (15) concentrating solar thermal power (15) ethanol (15) geodynamics (15) psychology (15) al gore (14) brazil (14) bucky fuller (14) carbon emissions (14) fertiliser (14) ambient energy (13) biodiesel (13) cities (13) investment (13) kenya (13) matthew simmons (13) public transport (13) big oil (12) biochar (12) chile (12) desertec (12) internet of things (12) otec (12) texas (12) victoria (12) antarctica (11) cradle to cradle (11) energy policy (11) hybrid car (11) terra preta (11) tinfoil (11) toyota (11) amory lovins (10) fabber (10) gazprom (10) goldman sachs (10) gtl (10) severn estuary (10) volt (10) afghanistan (9) alaska (9) biomass (9) carbon trading (9) distributed generation (9) esolar (9) four day week (9) fuel cells (9) jeremy leggett (9) methane hydrates (9) pge (9) sweden (9) arrow energy (8) bolivia (8) eroei (8) fish (8) floating offshore wind power (8) guerilla gardening (8) linc energy (8) methane (8) nanosolar (8) natural gas pipelines (8) pentland firth (8) relocalisation (8) saul griffith (8) stirling engine (8) us elections (8) western australia (8) airborne wind turbines (7) bloom energy (7) boeing (7) chp (7) climategate (7) copenhagen (7) scenario planning (7) vinod khosla (7) apocaphilia (6) ceramic fuel cells (6) cigs (6) futurism (6) jatropha (6) local currencies (6) nigeria (6) ocean acidification (6) somalia (6) t boone pickens (6) space based solar power (5) varanus island (5) garbage (4) global energy grid (4) kevin kelly (4) low temperature geothermal power (4) oled (4) tim flannery (4) v2g (4) club of rome (3) norman borlaug (2) peak oil portfolio (1)