Coal to Liquid: Policies, Innovation, and Technology

Abstract

Coal is a major source of energy. Coal-to-Liquid development offers an extent of basic

things that are made by melting coal. These strategies and developments make made powers and

waxes that are naturally very much arranged and to an incredible degree accommodating to

various organizations. Coal-to-Liquid can supply liquid invigorates and have been viably used in

a couple of cases. The purpose of this paper is to get a perception of the critical parts of coal

liquefaction headways, that is basic for orchestrating and policy making. Making future coal to

liquid structures facilitated in a generously greater overall essentialness and fuel utilization

system. Coal-to-Liquids development has been made tirelessly to create gas and diesel empowers

as the enthusiasm for essentialness security issue and fluid fuel in China. There are wide extents

of preferences that start from Coal-to-Liquid that are used in ordinary everyday presence, for

instance, petrochemicals, waxes, feedstocks for plastics create, and fuel gas. This paper will

similarly go in dept on South Africa's flourishing with the progression and making of Coal-to-

Liquid that has led the US and China to watch and take after suite.
 Table of Contents

I. Introduction

a. History on coal-to-liquid

II. Why coal liquefaction

III. Technique and Innovation

a. Manufactured powers

IV. Direct coal liquefaction

a. Types of process

b. Process evolution

c. Current Status

V. Advancements

a. Arrangements

b. Policy making

VI. South Africa’s advancement

VII. Coal Consumptions

VIII. Conclusion

a. Opportunities for improvement

Introduction

World oil prices have reached record highs in 2007 and 2008. Concerns about current and

potentially higher future petroleum costs for imported oil have reinvigorated interest in finding

ways to use unconventional fossil fuels to displace petroleum, derived gasoline and diesel fuels.

Oil consumers to foreign oil producers, giving rise to economic gains and potential benefits to

national security. To produce liquid fuels, oil, tar sands, biomass and coal can all be used. Coal

seems to demonstrate the best outcome, considering the potential for production and commercial

readiness. Global, proven recoverable reserves are estimated to be one billion tons, almost three

times the energy of proven petroleum reserves. The technology already exists to convert coal to

liquid fuels. Since the 1950s, South Africa has been producing commercial coal-to-liquids. In

addition, CTL production at crude oil prices seems economically feasible well below the prices

seen in 2007 and 2008. Without effective greenhouse gas emission control measures, however,

the production and use of coal, derived liquids to displace transport fuels from petroleum could

approximately double the rate at which carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. Without

an effective national program to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses, whether the federal

government would support the development of a CTL industry able to produce millions of

barrels of liquid fuels per day is not yet confirmed.

Coal is physically and chemically a heterogeneous copolymer consisting mainly of

organic materials consisting of large complex molecules containing mainly cross - linked

aromatic ring structures and various amounts of sulfur, nitrogen and oxygen as structural

components inorganically and organically bound. Raw coal is moisturized and contains solid

particles
 The security of oil supply and price concerns have led to a renewed interest in coal as an

alternative to the production of transport fuels and chemicals. By using technologies for the

conversion of coal, such as coal to liquids, the vast coal resources of the world could become an

important alternative to crude oil. Coal to liquid describes both coal gasification in combination

with the synthesis of Fischer-Tropsch to produce liquid fuels and less developed direct

liquefaction technologies. Coal gasification is widely used in the manufacture of chemicals and

fertilizers, particularly in China, where 8,000 coal gasifiers operate. Fischer-Tropsch synthesis,

first developed in Germany, has been further developed and improved in South Africa by Sasol.

There are alternative liquid hydrocarbon fuels that can be obtained from different

feedstocks that range from solids to gases. Coal-to-liquids is a technology that can use three main

approaches such as pyrolysis, direct liquefaction of coal and indirect liquefaction of coal. Gas

and biomass to fluids are connected alternatives dependent on non-coal feedstock. When all is

said in done, the engineered fuel properties of traditional oil powers can be relatively

indistinguishable. CTL is a standout amongst the most sensible elective fluid fills approaches,

having just been in fact and economically created and different examinations, significant future

utilization of CTL is required to diminish the effect of diminishing regular oil supplies.

Coal can be used either directly or indirectly to produce liquid fuels suitable for transport

purposes by removing carbon or by adding hydrogen. The first approach is usually referred to as

carbonization or pyrolysis and has low yields. The second approach is called liquefaction. Since

the cost of converting coal to useful liquid fuels outweighs the cost of crude oil refining, the

relatively low price of raw coal feedstock is the main incentive to pursue the technology. Direct

liquefaction is potentially the most efficient route available at present, with a dry weight of more

than 70 percent. Although there are many different direct processes, it is common to dissolve a
high proportion of the coal in a solvent at high temperature and pressure, followed by catalyzed

hydrocracking of the dissolved coal with hydrogen gas. The overall energy efficiency of the best

modern processes is generally between 60 and 70% and the technology was demonstrated in

large pilot plants. The less efficient but commercially proven indirect liquefaction process relies

on carbon gasification to produce synthesis gas which then reacts to temperature and pressure

over a catalyst to produce the desired liquid products.

South Africa was a special case, as it became increasingly politically isolated between the

mid-1950s and the mid-1980s over the three decades. South Africa was unable to trade freely in

oil and oil products and has very large reserves of coal. Indirect liquefaction was chosen because

it was considered more suitable for South African coal. Built in the 1950s was the first plant,

Sasol 1. In 1980 and 1982, two much larger plants were built using the same basic process

chemistry but using better catalyst formulations and reactor designs. In the mid-1980s, these

plants together produced up to 10 million tons of transport fuels per year, or 60 percent of the

requirements of South Africa. All three factories are still in service. Outside South Africa,

interest in coal transport fuels continued to be low until the early 1970s.

The following figure below shows the options for coal to liquid conversion plants.

Fig. 1. Different routes of coal liquefaction

 Figure 2: SASOL in South Africa

Why Coal Liquefaction

Advantages of CTL consist of improving national and economic security, lessens

dependence on foreign oil, and uses domestic resources and produces more jobs for Americans.

CTL provides environmental benefits such as cleaner fuels that reduce nitrogen oxide and

particulate emissions and enables use of higher efficiency engines. Also, is capable of capturing

CO2 emissions, and provides geographic diversity as energy source. There are two basic

approaches to convert coal to a liquid fuel, direct and indirect liquefaction. Direct liquefaction

dissolves coal at a high temperature and pressure in a solvent. Indirect liquefaction involves first

gasification of coal and then the combination of carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Indirect coal

liquefaction is proven technology. The oldest method of obtaining carbon liquids is pyrolysis at

high temperatures. Coal is ordinarily warmed to around 950 ° C. The warmth causes decay and

the unstable issue is evacuated and the carbon content increments. The procedure results in low

fluid yields and moderately high expenses of overhauling. Coal tar in the vehicle area is

generally not utilized as a fuel. It is utilized around the world, in any case, to create material,

waterproofing and protection items and as a crude material for various hues, medications and

paints. Gentle temperature pyrolysis utilizes 450– 650° C temperatures. A great part of the

unpredictable material is released, and different mixes are framed by warm rot. Fluid yields are
higher than for pyrolysis at high temperatures yet achieve a most extreme of 20%. This method

was for the most part used to overhaul low - level coals by expanding the calorific esteem and

lessening the substance of Sulfur. Pyrolysis has low fluid yields and characteristically low

proficiency. Also, the subsequent fluids must be dealt with further before they can be utilized in

existing vehicles. The disadvantage of all pyrolysis and carbonization processes is that the

remaining solid 's hydrogen content must be reduced if the hydrogen content of the feedstock

coal is to be increased to the point where it becomes a distillable liquid. In any case, the liquids

produced are still of low quality and require additional treatment to remove solid contaminants

and water. The resulting liquid products can then be mixed to produce fuel for heating and

stationary turbine use. For the raw products to be used in transport fuels, they require still further

treatment. In order to be economically viable, mixing and processing with conventional refinery

feedstocks is probably necessary.

Technique and Innovation

There are many different types of CTL fuel conversion techniques, while only a few have

been marketed and demonstrated by the industry. CTL technology is an ancient concept that

needs to be combined with modern processes and machinery to fulfill today's economic and

environmental constraints. The current innovative foundation of customary handling of unrefined

petroleum and gas liquefaction can have synergistic impacts that lessen expenses and research. In

a few spots, explore on manufactured energizes from non - coal feedstock exists where, coal is

excessively costly or unreasonable, making it impossible to procure. In principle, FT union can

be utilized to create fluid fills from exceptionally flighty feedstock if there is hydrogen and

carbon. In patent applications, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and other exhaust fumes were

used as feedstock.
 Direct Coal Liquefaction is believed to be more energy - efficient in the production of

liquid fuels than Indirect Coal Liquefaction, justified by the simplicity of the partial breakdown

of DCL compared to the total reconstruction of coal used in ICL. Different qualities, for

example, natural effect, adaptability and process unwavering quality, a more total orderly

perspective of the innovation choices ought to likewise be considered. The general productivity

of the DCL procedure is assessed at 73 percent. Different gatherings gauge the warm

productivity of 60 to 70%. ICL's overall efficiency is 58.3% and 55.1%.

The overall efficiency of ICL is typically about 50%. Van Vliet et al. directed an itemized

investigation of vitality streams for ICL diesel. DCL efficiencies are typically used to create

grungy Syncrude, which requires all the more refining preceding use, and ICL efficiencies are

frequently used to deliver last items. While thinking about the refining of DCL items, some ICL-

determined fuel can be created with a higher end-utilize proficiency than its DCL partners. It is

additionally at times hazy whether additional vitality is incorporated into the dissects for process

warm, hydrogen generation and process control, making proficiency correlations much touchier.

CTL requires more to produce usable fuel than coal. Heat, vitality, impetuses and

different synthetics are expected to work. Water is a basic piece of the procedure, either water for

cooling and evaporator should likewise be given, and for a bigger plant the measure of water

expended can be expansive without a doubt.

The water consumption for DCL and ICL is roughly equivalent. Water consumption for a

50,000 barrels per day, US coal facility would be 40,000–50,000 in the region. The accessibility

of water is in this way a basic factor to be considered amid the establishment of CTL

establishments. Coal granulating and water blending is another procedure step which expends

vitality and water. The DCL framework expects hydrogen to break into Syncrude the carbon.
The hydrogen is the expensive piece of the DCL framework. High efficiency designs often

acquire hydrogen from natural gas steam reform. Coal grinding and water mixing is another

process step which consumes, however, DCL systems can also be modified by so-called water,

gas shift reactions to produce hydrogen from coal. The heat procedure required to acquire

Syncrude is typically provided by coal. ICL utilizes gigantic measures of steam to separate coal

into syngas, which requires extensive vitality input. Syngas treatment and cleaning is required

with the end goal to ensure impetuses. This normally includes gas cooling and detachment steps,

all of which require additional vitality. In any case, a portion of this vitality can be created in

reusing forms from Sulfur and different mixes isolated from the syngas. Some ICL designs

deliver more power than they utilize when overabundance warm is changed over to power.

Direct and Indirect Coal Liquefaction

Direct liquefaction processes attempt to add hydrogen to the organic structure of the coal

and break it down only to the extent that distillable liquids are required. There are many different

processes developed, but most of them are closely related to the underlying reaction chemistry.

Common characteristics include the dissolution of a large proportion of coal in a solvent at high

temperature and pressure, followed by a dissolved carbon hydrocracking with H2 and a catalyst.

Direct liquefaction is currently the most efficient route. Liquid yields in excess of 70% by weight

of the dry, mineral matter-free coal feed have been demonstrated for some processes in favorable

circumstances. Overall thermal efficiencies for modern processes generally range from 60 to 70

percent if losses and other imports of non - coal energy are allowed. The liquid products of direct

liquefaction processes are of much higher quality than those of pyrolysis processes and can be

used in most stationary fuel applications without blending. In any case, they should be

additionally updated before they can be utilized as transport fills. This upgrade uses standard
techniques in the petroleum industry to blend the products from a liquefaction plant into the

feedstock streams of a petroleum refinery. Direct liquefaction processes can easily be divided

into two main groups, depending on whether the initial carbon dissolution is separated from the

conversion of the dissolved carbon into distillable products. A single - stage process of direct

liquefaction gives distillates via a primary reactor or a series of reactors. Such processes may

include an integrated online hydrotreating reactor designed to upgrade the primary distillates

without the overall conversion being directly increased. A two - stage direct liquefaction process

is designed to provide distillates through two reactors or series reactor trains. The primary

function of the first stage is the dissolution of coal and is operated either without a catalyst or

with a disposable catalyst of low activity only. In the second stage, in the presence of a high -

activity catalyst, heavy coal liquids produced in this way are hydrotreated to produce additional

distillates.

Direct carbon liquefaction dissolves coal at high temperature and pressure in the

presence of a solvent that breaks the hydrocarbon structure for approximately one hour. Catalysts

are used to improve conversion rates of carbon from solid to liquid. The resulting liquid coals

have molecular structures that need to be upgraded further to produce useful fuels such as

gasoline and oil. The indirect liquefaction of coal involves a complete breakdown of coal by

gasification into other compounds. The subsequent combination gas is altered to accomplish the

hydrogen and carbon monoxide balance that is required. The synthesis gas is then cleaned, and

Sulphur and other impurities are removed which can disturb further reactions. The synthesis gas

is finally reached by a catalyst to supply the desired product with FT reactions. The resulting

liquid forms a range of hydrocarbon and petrol, diesel, methanol and other chemicals. Although

this indirect process produces a greater number of by-products and has a lower overall thermal
efficiency, cleaner fuels are produced. Sasol in South Africa possesses the main business ICL

plants with settled and demonstrated innovation and a great deal of operational involvement in

activity. Sasol has built up a few distinctive ICL advancements. Today trend setting innovations

from the 1990s are being utilized, including the high - temperature FT blend of Sasol Advanced

Synthol and the low - temperature FT amalgamation of the Sasol Slurry Phase.

DCL endeavors to make the liquefaction and refining of coal as conceivable through the

generation of engineered unrefined petroleum as regular raw petroleum preparing. By

maintaining a strategic distance from the total breakdown of coal, some effectiveness can be

accomplished, and the measure of liquefaction hardware required is lessened.

Coal contains many different substances in different quantities, some of them unwanted

or even toxic. A few substances may harm impetuses or pass on to the manufactured raw

petroleum that outcomes. In the DCL procedure, consistently changing natural controls may

expect modification, to expect it to agree to new administrative necessities, similarly as the

preparing of unrefined petroleum must be reconsidered when new ecological conventions are

presented. In correlation, ICL utilizes a fuel methodology for fashioners. An arrangement of fuel

criteria is set and sought-after utilizing items that can be delivered in FT combination. A

significant number of the distinctive procedures will deliver hydrocarbon energizes that are

better than traditional oil subordinates. The disposal of inborn poisonous materials in coals isn't

just a choice; it is fundamental to secure the impetuses of the combination reactor. A long way

from all ICL-determined items, vitality is superior to its oil - inferred partners with regards to

vitality content or different attributes. All ICL energizes are intrinsically perfect and practically

free of nitrogen, Sulfur and sweet-smelling substances, for the most part diminishing outflows

when combusted. DCL produces unrefined Syncrude while ICL generally leads to final products.
 Table 1. Summary of major DCL processes developed around the world [3-9].

Country Process Reactor Catalyst Capacity (t/d) Time

SRC-I Coal slurry dissolver — 6 1974
SRC-II Coal slurry dissolver — 50/25 1974-1981
EDS Entrained bed Ni/Moc 250 1979-1983
USA
H-Coal Fluidized bed Co-Mo/Al2O3 600 1979-1982
CTSL Fluidized bed Ni/Mo 2 1985-1992
HTI Suspended bed GelCatTM 3 1990s
Red- muda,
IGOR Fixed bed 200 1981-1987
Germany Ni-Mo/Al2O3b

PYROSOL Counter-current — 6 1977-1988

b Fe-baseda,
BCL Fixed bed 50 1986-1990
Japan Ni-Mo/Al2O3b

Table 2. The operating parameters and experiment results of some major DCL
processes [3-9].
Process HTI IGOR NEDOL
Shenhua

Coal Shenhua Xianfeng lignite Shenhua Shenhua

Temperature ( °C) 440~450 470 465 455
Pressure (MPa) 17 30 18 19
3
Space velocity (t/m /h) 0.24 0.60 0.36 0.70
Conversion (%,daf coal) 93.5 97.5 89.7 91.7
C4+oils (%, daf coal) 67.2 58.6 52.8 61.4
a
Residues (%, daf coal) 13.4 11.7 28.1 14.7
Hydrogen consumption (% daf coal) 8.7 11.2 6.1 5.5
a
Including ash, spent catalyst and un-converted coal

The operating and experimental parameters of four major DCL processes. These new

DCL processes inherit the advantages of old processes, but they promote technologies by new

catalysts and reactors and operating conditions.

China has built a commercial DCL plant in Shenhua, as shown in Table 1, and is the

world's first commercial DCL plant since World War II. The Shenhua DCL process has been

developed in two phases, from a bench scale unit to a pilot process development unit. These

experiments confirmed the feasibility and reliability of the DCL process in Shenhua. The
Shenhua DCL process is a milestone in the industrialization. The reliability of both the DCL

process and the equipment was confirmed by the end of 2005 and a high conversion rate was

achieved with hydrogen consumption. Construction of the demonstration plant began in August

2004 and liquid oils were successfully produced in December 2008 through a test run. This made

China the only country in the world to achieve direct production of coal to liquid on a scale of 1

million tons. Unfortunately, the operation of the Shenhua plant was suspended in June 2009 due

to concerns about economics and greenhouse gas emissions, although it was planned to produce

5 million tons of synthetic fuel per year at a construction site.

Coal is China's primary energy resource, accounting for 91% of China's annual energy

consumption and 70% of China's total fossil energy reserves. For a long time, coal will keep

dominating Chinese energy market. Lignite is an important fossil energy resource in China

among different types of coal. By the end of 1995, Chinese lignite had shown recoverable

reversals of 130 billion tons, accounting for more than 13 percent of China 's total coal reserve

and according to the third national coal prediction 190 billion tons. However, compared with

bituminous and high rank coal, lignite has some disadvantages, such as high as content, high

water content, high sulfur content, low heating value, degradation under windy conditions, and

spontaneous combustion. Lignite is mainly used to generate electricity through combustion or by

pyrolysis to generate combustion gas. However, these processes require not only high input

energy, but also air pollutants such as sulfide and oxides of nitrogen. Therefore, a new

technology needs to be developed for the economic and environmental use of lignite. Bio-

liquidation of lignite to liquid fuel and chemicals is a potential technology in which

microorganisms liquefy lignite without generating air pollutants in ambient conditions. In the
1980s, German researcher Fakoussa reported that microorganisms showed the ability at room

temperatures to liquefy lignite.

Hybrid Coal Liquefaction means that DCL, ICL processes are integrated and the

Headwater Company in the USA has proposed them. DCL comprises preparation of coal slurry,

liquefaction, distillation of liquefied oil, hydrogenation of solvents and upgrading of liquefied

oil. ICL incorporates the gasification of coal, gas purging, roundabout liquefaction and

generation of intensity. The HCL process has the advantages of both DCL and ICL, with each

process sharing utility and facility and operating costs possibly reduced. The ICL can also supply

the considerable amount of hydrogen necessary for the DCL. Furthermore, it is easy to control

diesel and naphtha as key products of the carbon liquefaction process output, so that outputs can

be tailored to meet fluctuating demand. HCL plants in coastal areas have been built. DCL and

ICL aspects are both included in the failure to duplicate unit processes.

Advancement

CTL systems also need to be able to withstand an uncertain future. Stricter natural

directions, higher interest for fluid energizes, vitality and power and vitality security issues are

imperative factors that can significantly affect any innovation. DCL has a poor prospect of high -

quality diesel, making it an unseemly candidate for vitality - proficient end-utilize advancements.

Fuel adaptability, for example, the likelihood of blending the coal feedstock with biomass, tar

sand or waste material, is additionally an extensive favorable position. FT union likewise

delivers naphtha as a side-effect that can be a profitable feedstock for the compound ventures

and empower extra business openings. One conceivable future outcome is the purported

hydrogen society, which eliminates hydrocarbon fills and replaces them with hydrogen energy

components. DCL devours hydrogen amid the splitting procedure and unadulterated hydrogen
can't be acquired amid the DCL procedure. In correlation, ICL can create hydrogen and the

progressions required to change from hydrocarbons to hydrogen are moderately minor.

Methanol, ethanol or other comparable fills are elective powers with a worthy proficiency,

prompting different changes. Methanol and numerous different powers can be delivered more

effectively by ICL than by DCL. The closeness of DCLs to customary oil preparing ought to not

be ignored, be that as it may, as it can give a way to alleviate regular raw petroleum deficiencies

without building totally new transport fuel frameworks. Syncrude from DCL offers the

likelihood to broaden the life and ease of use of the present framework by diminishing regular oil

supplies.

Both CTL hopefuls are DCL and ICL advancements; the fluid part acquired from

pyrolysis is just too little and of too minimal quality. There are contrasts in vitality effectiveness,

yet in the event that the end utilize is considered, these distinctions diminish and turn out to be

generally little. Fundamental highlights don't support any of the methodologies and possibility

depends to a great extent on the future society and vitality framework in which CTL ought to be

incorporated. ICL fuel and ICL diesel, is for the most part cleaner and can beat numerous DCL

powers and ordinary discharge fills. By and large, ICL innovation will put the coal vitality

framework on a way that is more worried about nature, while DCL does not offer this chance to

a similar degree. ICL offers more factor frameworks that can create a larger number of items

than DCL frameworks, in polygene apportion structures. The current framework underpins the

improvement of ICL substantially more than DCL. In addition, ICL can deal with more future

results and generally have better transitional properties. DCL is a less adaptable progress

innovation with more grounded connects to the present format of the ordinary fuel framework.
This can likewise be leverage, be that as it may, because DCL can be utilized to keep up existing

framework as ordinary raw petroleum becomes rare.

South Africa’s Advancement

Since 1955, South Africa produces coal, derived fuels and today about 30% of the

country 's gasoline and diesel needs come from indigenous coal. In the late 1970s, the former

state-owned company Sasol expanded its coal capacity to liquids by building the facilities Sasol

II and III, now known as the Complex Sasol Secunda. While initially considerable floor price

protection was offered, little protection remains today. The South African coal's total capacity for

liquid operations now exceeds 160,000 barrels per day of product. Since the beginning of its

liquid coal operation, Sasol has produced over 1.5 billion barrels of synthetic fuel and chemical

products and its products are currently sold in over 90 countries worldwide. Sasol is currently

working on the Turbo project, which will allow unleaded fuels to be produced. These fuels will

add more than 200 fuels and chemicals already produced by the company. The operation of Sasol

and the safe and reliable supply of petroleum to the domestic market, it also contributes

substantially to the South African economy. Sasol contributes directly to the national gross

domestic product of 2 per cent. Sasol saves the country more than $ 4 billion per year in foreign

exchange and contributes over $1 billion per year in taxes and levies to the government.

One advantage of CTL technology is that car engines do not need to be modified to use

the product. Truth be told, the everyday generation of Sasol supplies 30% of the vehicle needs of

South Africa. Fuel specialists’ figure that condensed coal will give transport fuel to a significant

part of the world in the following 20 years. The US Air Force has ventured up its attention on

CTL with undertakings to supplant stream fuel with fluid energizes got from coal. For just 41

years, the world has had enough realized oil holds, yet 155 years of coal saves; the innovation is
in this way set to appreciate further revival somewhere else, paying little respect to its expense

and condition. Melted coal emanates twice as much carbon dioxide as consuming oil, with the

goal that nations that need to restrain ozone harming substance discharges may need to discover

elective carbon exchanging components to adjust for CTL innovation harm. South Africa is

focused on lessening its carbon emanations, however since it is delegated a " creating nation, " it

has some breathing space before these progressions must be presented. CTL innovation

additionally radiates a lot of sulfur dioxide, driving tree huggers to campaign against it for

individuals living with respiratory issues in their neighborhood. Advocates of CTL innovation

have demonstrated that the innovation can be made strides. New plants catch carbon

underground as sequestration innovation traps and cover outflows of CO2 squander, ensuring the

climate against mischief. With sequestration, it is around 30 percent cleaner to control a vehicle

with fluid coal than with oil. New plants catch carbon underground as innovation sequestration

traps and cover CO2 squander emanations, securing the environment against mischief. With

sequestration, it is around 30 percent cleaner to control a vehicle with fluid coal than with

petroleum.

Coal to Liquid in China

China's CTL industry has experienced various stages in which the country has invested

heavily or cooled its CTL support. Before 2006, the industry was extremely enthusiastic about

enormous financial support and a series of favorable policies from the Central Government. The

enthusiasm of the central government for CTL at this stage was driven by many factors, but three

were most important, one was energy security, the second was the country's desire to balance

economic growth between high growth in the east and slower in the west, and thirdly, the need to

build energy movement infrastructure, notably coal, from where it is rich in supply, to the north
and west of the country, to where demand is highest, to the east and south. Until 2006, all three

of these forces were in line with the standard view of China 's CTL policy, the country that was

rich in coal but poor in oil pushed hard for CTL to reduce its dependence on imported oil.

The cautious attitude of the Chinese central government to CTL production is more

sensible than that of those local governments that support the rapid development of CTL.

Comparing EROI between CTL and other energy sources suggests that nuclear power, wind

power, solar energy or geothermal energy may be a better choice at least now compared to CTL.

Nevertheless, the government could continue to support research into coal liquefaction

technology and consider it a strategic reserve for technology. China is the second biggest

importer of oil in the world, second to the United States. Over the past 20 years, China's

dependence on oil imports has increased by 21.5 percent per year, reaching 59 percent in 2013.

Oil safety has thus become a problem. If a shortage of crude oil occurs or the import price

increases, economics will be badly affected. The CTL is at least an emergency tactic to meet

economic development's energy needs. Secondly, CTL production EROI can be improved in the

future. Energy efficiency and energy conversion efficiency will improve, along with the possible

results of technological advances in CTL production, applied electrical energy will decrease as

the energy gain increases and the overall value of EROI increases.

Environmental concerns, emissions of greenhouse gases, could hinder the development of

the CTL industry in oil-scarce countries. CTL emits more greenhouse gasses than traditional

energy and does not meet environmental requirements. While Carbon Capture and Storage

technology can be used to control emissions of carbon, it will also increase energy, which could

significantly have a negative impact on EROI. The additional energy inputs from CCS will make

it harder for CTL to compete with petroleum fuels than for CTL without CCS. Although some
aspects of CCS technology are currently mature on a global scale, technology is still in China's

research and demonstration phase. Improving CCS technology will improve the efficiency of all

aspects of the CTL process, thereby reducing the total energy input associated with its

deployment and improving its EROI. Promote large scale development of CCS, in order to

implement CCS projects commercially and in accordance with legislation in advanced countries,

the government should gradually establish applicable national laws and regulations along with a

standard infrastructure system. In addition, the government should provide more grants and

support for CCS related equipment and technology research and development.

Coal consumption

The measure of coal expended in CTL is regularly disregarded or in numerous

investigations. Coal is a limited asset, and this restricts the measure of fuel created by melting

coal. Down to earth points of interest on the supply of coal, for example, availability, transport

and creation, will influence the possibility of CTL. The undertaking Monash Energy CTL

endeavors to deliver fluid fills with 1.2 ton of lignite per barrel. Correlations of fluid yield are

troublesome on the grounds that yield relies upon the chosen specialized framework, the sort of

coal utilized, the framework outskirts and numerous different variables. Despite methodological

contrasts, all appraisals of CTL coal utilization are about the equivalent.

Sasol can be utilized to evaluate CTL 's carbon utilization observationally, as it is the

world's driving maker of CTL. The Secunda plant comprises of two CTL plants with a

consolidated limit of 150,000 barrels for each day and a yearly utilization of in excess of 40

million tons of coal. In 2003, the South African engineered fuel industry devoured 24 percent of

all coal created in South Africa, since Sasol's CTL plants are the main manufactured fuel maker

in South Africa, their coal utilization should likewise be reflected in this. South African coal
creation that year was 238 million tons and therefore the CTL division's coal utilization was 57

million tons. The whole coal in South Africa is named bituminous. This is in accordance with

different examinations ' gauges however will in general be in the lower extend. Contrasts in

specialized and Sasol gauges reflect contrasts in principle. Problematic conditions, misfortunes,

and breaks are inescapable parts of the real world, particularly in extensive scale modern

applications. Counting issues with the nature of coal, refining and further treatment, bring down

yields are additionally sensible. The Sasol exact change proportions are sensible. Comparative

transformation efficiencies are likewise practical for future huge CTL businesses, especially as

ICL is the more probable future improvement of CTL innovation.

Figure 2; South African Coal Consumption in 2003

Conclusion

ICL has all the earmarks of being the all probability picked choice for future CTL

ventures dependent on its expanded adaptability, enhanced ecological capacities and more

grounded understanding and framework bolster. Also, the fuel properties seem to profit ICL in

examination with DCL, especially if end-utilize efficiencies are considered rather than process
efficiencies. Assessed costs between the two sorts of frameworks seem comparable and neither

one of the approaches favors. More careful monetary investigations are anyway vital for an

exhaustive discourse, however the absence of business involvement with DCL is risky. Coal

utilization evaluations of coal liquefaction were exhibited in various investigations. A discerning

appraisal can be gotten from the Sasol encounter and utilized notwithstanding more simply

specialized assessments as a correlative guess. The probability that ICL will be the essential

contender for future substantial scale CTL businesses further legitimizes this gauge. The

contrasts between the assessed coal utilization from the experience of Sasol and different

assessments are little. The CTL transformation proportions are for the most part in the scope of

1-2 barrels of coal.

A sensible agreement that can come to an contrasting observational coal utilization

appraisals and change proportions with various CTL conjectures. When all is said in done,

numerous future CTL situations expect a lot higher change proportion than Sasol, prompting an

altogether lower utilization of coal. This could be an instance of flawed positive thinking or a

consequence of starry-eyed reasoning. Another conceivable clarification is that a few sections of

the procedure, for example, process water warming and process warm creation, have been

excluded.

We can observe the utilization of coal to be a critical factor in the CTL plausibility.

Critical generation of CTL requires a similarly substantial creation of coal and assets. We expect

just a couple of nations or locales to build up a huge CTL industry in a practical way. CTL will

successfully be constrained to the predominant coal save holders who can occupy their

generation offers to liquefaction.

Reference:

1. Fuels and combustion, S. Sarkar, 2nd edition, Orient Longman Ltd., 1990.

2. Direct Coal Liquefaction Overview Presented to NETL, John Winslow and Ed Schmetz,

Leonardo Technologies Inc., US Department of Energy, March 2000

3. Coal-to-Liquids - An Explanation

http://www.caer.uky.edu/catalysis/coal-to-liquids.shtml

4. Submenu

http://www.miningoilgasjobs.com.au/oil-gas-energy/hydrocarbons-and-

energy/energy/renewable-energy/earth/liquid-coal.aspx

5. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG754.pdf

6. https://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:293610/FULLTEXT02.pdf

7. https://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Research/Coal/energy%20systems/gasification

/technology-status-coal-liquefaction.pdf

8. https://www.iea.org/ciab/papers/workshopreport_nov06.pdf

9. http://energyskeptic.com/2015/ctl-can-not-make-up-for-declining-oil/

10. https://sustainable-economy.org/wp-content/uploads/CTL-Comments.pdf

11. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/426551/cleaner-cheaper-liquid-fuel-from-coal/

12. https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/coal-liquid-efficient-

gasoline1.htm

13. http://www.mediaclubsouthafrica.com/tech/38-tech/innovation-bg/123-liquid-fuel-from-

coal

14. https://www.sasol.com/media-centre/media-releases/sasol-produces-15-billion-barrels-

synthetic-fuel-coal-fifty-years
15. https://www.ogj.com/articles/print/volume-95/issue-11/in-this-issue/general-

interest/synthetic-fuels-aiding-south-africa-to-advance-its-world-energy-role.html