Lighting Up Synfuel's Future

A vast new industry built on coal, shale and garbage

More than building the first atomic bomb, more even than putting the first men on the moon, the creation from scratch of an entirely new industry to produce synthetic fuels would be the most ambitious technical venture that the U.S. has ever undertaken. From outright subsidies to price guarantees, the Government would offer many incentives for private firms to produce oil-like liquids and natural gas from the nation's plentiful coal, shale rock and biomass.* Congressmen are infatuated with the idea of synthetic-fuel production. Cracks Representative Clarence Brown of Ohio: "Every committee in Congress has a synfuel bill, except the Ethics Committee."

The best bet is thought to be production of oil and gas from coal. Carter has set a goal of the equivalent of 1 million to 1.5 million bbl. a day by 1990. The technology is well known. South Africa gets 10% of its oil from coal and expects the total to rise to 48% by 1983.

In the most common process, coal is heated under great pressure to 900DEG F. As the coal decomposes, it releases oil and gas. Another extraction method, which adds hydrogen to coal that is heated under pressure, will be tested at a small, experimental plant operated by several oil companies in Catlettsburg, Ky. It should be able to convert 600 tons of coal into 1,800 bbl. of oil a day. At a DOE-funded plant in Fort Lewis, Wash., Gulf Oil since 1974 has been testing yet another process called "solvent refined coal," which uses chemicals to remove impurities from the synthetic oil.

Another possibility is unconventional gas, which is the same as natural gas, but much harder to extract. It is found under the surface--in the Rocky Mountain region, in the shales of Appalachia, in huge underground caverns stretching below land and sea along the coastlines of Louisiana and east Texas, and in many coal seams all over the country. Because it is costly, the development of unconventional gas had been blocked until natural gas price controls were lifted last year. Now Carter anticipates production to reach the equivalent of 500,000 to 1 million bbl. of oil a day by 1990.

Though the U.S. has some oil-saturated tar sands, they are not large or accessible enough to justify expensive exploitation by the Government. But some 76 billion bbl. in oil, about three times the nation's proven reserves of conventional crude, are known to be recoverable from the shale rock concentrated in western Colorado and stretching into Utah and Wyoming. No plants are in operation at present, but at least five companies are running experimental digs in the area. To produce a barrel of oil, about 1 1/2 tons of rock must be mined and heated. So far, the process requires huge amounts of water --scarce in the West--and leaves huge piles of ashlike rubble. To avoid mining and the problems it brings, Occidental Petroleum is testing a new method. Fires are started in underground mines to separate the oil into pools; then it is pumped to the surface. That technique is promising but far from perfected.

The conversion of biomass into energy has been increasing even without Government help. Power plants in many cities, including New York, Chicago and Milwaukee, burn garbage to produce electricity, and more and more grain, sugar cane, wood wastes and other residues are being fermented into alcohol fuels.

Because of inflation and increasing costs of environmental controls, price predictions for building synfuel plants have been rising steadily. The new range is from $1 billion to $3 billion for an oil shale or coal liquefaction plant that would produce 50,000 to 100,000 bbl. a day. A coal gasification plant would run some $1.5 billion. Ever climbing costs have kept estimated prices of producing synfuels persistently dancing ahead of world crude prices. In 1973, when oil was $3.50 a bbl., oil from shale was figured at $4.50. Just before OPEC'S latest price rise, when crude was selling at $17 a bbl., shale oil was reckoned to cost $25 and oil from coal about $30.

The major problem is not financial but environmental. Extracting oil from shale is thought to be the greatest pollution threat. Thus, the toughest environmental battles will probably rage in Colorado and other shale-rich Western states, which have generally strict pollution-control laws. There will also be local resistance to coal gasification and liquefaction plants because they pollute the air with fumes from burning and lead to a noisy, dust-spewing increase in rail traffic to bring in the coal. On the other side, labor unions and various local groups will be eager to attract synfuel plants--particularly in Appalachia--because they will bring jobs and wealth.

Carter's plan leaves many questions unanswered. Nobody in Washington seems to know how much energy would be expended just to build the plants, roads, railroads, machines and tools needed to create the synfuels industry--and how much time would pass before the U.S. realized a net energy gain. Simply building the necessary infrastructure will chew up years. Yet the payoff in the form of oil and gas could be so enormous that the U.S. might, some decades hence, become again an exporter of energy. The U.S. has an enormous potential lode of synthetic fuel, and the growing consensus among business and political leaders is that this is the right time to test and exploit it.

*The energy stored in all plants and vegetation, including grain, wood and even garbage.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.