Synthetic liquid fuels development: assessment of critical factors. Volume IV. Energy/economic comparison of coal-based automotive energy supply systems. [Automobile efficiency included]

Technical Report · Sun May 01 04:00:00 EDT 1977

DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/7279055· OSTI ID:7279055

Steele, R. V.; Sharma, K. J.; Dickson, E. M.

The comparison of options was focused on energy supply systems that could provide automotive energy. Six coal-based energy forms--gasoline refined from synthetic crude oil (syncrude), methanol, gasoline produced by Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, liquid hydrogen, liquid methane, and electricity--were analyzed in terms of cost and energy consumption. Using only coal-based energy forms promoted consistency in the comparison of options. The five synthetic liquid fuels could be used in conventional or modified internal combustion engines, while electricity was assumed for use in powering electric cars that employ an advanced battery such as lithium-sulfur. Included in the energy supply systems were coal mining, coal transport, coal conversion, product transport, refining (for syncrude only), and product distribution. The reslts of the cost analysis showed that syncrude/gasoline is the least costly option, followed by methanol, methane, Fischer-Tropsch gasoline, hydrogen, and electricity. The costs of methane and methanol produced by in-situ gasification of coal were found to be lower than all options except syncrude/gasoline. When the efficiency of converting various fuels to motive power in an automobile is considered, the relative cost picture changes. Using nominal internal combustion engine efficiencies (subcompact car) for the five liquid fuels, and the electricity consumption for an advanced electric car, electricity is the lowest cost option on a cents per mile basis, followed by syncrude/gasoline, methanol, methane, hydrogen, and Fischer-Tropsch gasoline. The results of the energy analysis showed that the energy consumed in delivering 10/sup 6/ Btu of automotive fuel or electricity can range from a low of 0.8 x 10/sup 6/ Btu for syncrude/gasoline to a high of 2.5 x 10/sup 6/ Btu for Fischer-Tropsch gasoline. As in the cost analysis, the consideration of automotive energy efficiency results in a different picture for each option in terms of energy consumption.

• Research Organization: Stanford Research Inst., Menlo Park, Calif. (USA)
• DOE Contract Number: EY-76-C-03-0115
• OSTI ID: 7279055
• Report Number(s): ERDA-76-129/4
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT
010404 -- Coal
Lignite
& Peat-- Gasification
010405 -- Coal
Lignite
& Peat-- Hydrogenation & Liquefaction
08 HYDROGEN
080600 -- Hydrogen-- Industrial & Commercial Use-- (-1989)
090110 -- Hydrocarbon Fuels-- Properties-- (1979-1989)
090210 -- Alcohol Fuels-- Properties-- (1976-1989)
10 SYNTHETIC FUELS
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY
290100 -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Energy Analysis & Modeling
295000* -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Hydrogen & Synthetic Fuels
33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS
330800 -- Emission Control-- Alternative Fuels
ALCOHOLS
ALKANES
AUTOMOBILES
AUTOMOTIVE FUELS
CHEMICAL REACTIONS
COAL GASIFICATION
COAL LIQUEFACTION
COAL LIQUIDS
COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS
COST
CRYOGENIC FLUIDS
EFFICIENCY
ELECTRIC-POWERED VEHICLES
ENERGY ANALYSIS
FISCHER-TROPSCH SYNTHESIS
FLUIDS
FUELS
GASIFICATION
GASOLINE
HYDROCARBONS
HYDROGEN FUELS
HYDROXY COMPOUNDS
IN-SITU GASIFICATION
IN-SITU PROCESSING
LIQUEFACTION
METHANE
METHANOL
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
PROCESSING
REFINING
SYNTHETIC FUELS
SYNTHETIC PETROLEUM
VEHICLES