Enviros consider that all CTL or coal-to-liquids fuel products are the same.  They are NOT !!!

Fischer-Tropsch synfuel technology was developed by Hitler's chemists to produce alternative fuels for his WW II efforts.  These very same FT elements are being touted by promoters right now rather big time in the USA.  

Their FT chemistry sets are very, very expensive and may take 5 years to construct.  The CTL folks talk mostly about synthetic diesel and naptha as products produced from the coal.  These CTL promoters never talk about leftover paraffin waxes which there is no market for.  And they don't want to talk about all the CO2 which is offgassed as the ground coal feedstock is otherwise rather cleanly and efficiently gasified into synthesis gas (CO & H2) as the building blocks to produce long-chained paraffin waxes.

These waxy chains are 40 to 60 carbons long.  It then takes hydrogen to break these carbon-carbon bonds of the wax into smaller molecules.  And the discussion typically stops here with synthetic diesel being the principle "end product" from CTL.  Syndiesel IS cleaner combusting than petroleum diesel is and sulfur free as well.  However very little talk or education goes into what happens next to produce kerosene-based jet fuel or synthetic gasoline instead of syndiesel.  And NO talk goes into patents on syndiesel/petroleum diesel formula usage blends owned by Exxon.

Well, this CTL process needs 2x the hydrogen quantities for hydrocracking the paraffin waxes into jet fuel as when compared to synthetic diesel.  The synfuel refiners need 3x to 4x the hydrogen atoms to convert paraffin wax into even shorter molecules resembling gasoline.

How do they isolate Hydrogen from the coal?  This is rather easy to accomplish however they offgas a pure slipstream of CO2 emissions to the atmosphere when isolating the Hydrogen from hydrocarbon coal.  Hydrogen in quantity is pretty expensive to isolate for refinery processes which gobble so much of it up.  Any oil refinery is always on the lookout for more, cheap hydrogen used to convert thicker, waxier hydrocarbon (oily) molecules into thinner, more profitable fuel molecules.

What IF someone figured out how to recycle all this CO2 and use it for carbon feedstock - just like the coal which was used for carbonaceous feedstock to produce the alternative fuel in the first place?  Sir Richard?

What IF someone figured out how to produce a new, stronger Btu (biodegradable) green biofuel from the coal instead of float-on-water syndiesel?  And accomplish this at 1/4 to 1/2 the construction costs of the Fischer-Tropsch synfuels plants resulting in brand new biofuel that could be synthesized for less than 50¢ per gallon and be blended back into all flavors of refined petroleum products.

Obama:  Stay tuned Sir.  There is a sleeping green giant waking up that you might like to ride a good ways down the block - whether in Illinois or in D.C.

Best Regards,

Gary Bridge
Energy Technologist

Anyway: Obama a flip-flopper?  More like in the pocket of the coal industry.  It'd be nice if real sustainable technology was successful enough to support politicians...  But we're so focused on finding new energy rather than implementing energy-saving design that we'll just dig ourselves deeper... into the ground... for coal...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ1dECu5sSc

switchgrass is looking good, less nitrogen, up to twice more fuel per acre than corn.

types of sweet potatoes are being researched in the South, good for poor soil types...

did you see the sweet potato lady following edwards?

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/12/politics/fromther ...