Australian Rare Earths

Australian Alternative Energy Forum


Not Really a Forum, more of my memory aid.


Comments on this forum should never be taken as investment advice.


Go Back   Alternative Energy Forums > Alternative Energy Discussion > UCG (undeground coal gasification)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-25-2011, 04:15 AM
Sparty Sparty is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,765
Default Central Petroleum CTP running hard today

It looks like CTP is starting to run hard. No new news but I think that the re-run of the ABC's Catalyst program that compared Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) to Coal Seam Methane (CSM) with all of its problems with underground water depletion has got people thinking about the relative merits of UCG.

UCG not only doesn't have to extract literally millions of liters of salty underground water and the consequent risks to the local farmers land when it is dumped into evaporation ponds and to the Great Artesian Basin itself and the known effects on the local water table, UCG also provides for a much more efficient and less costly utilisation of the coal itself.

CSM extraction is said to use less than 5% of the coals' energy whereas UCG uses around 98% of the coals' energy. This coupled with the ability to vary the input air mix into the burn chamber also means that different gas mixes can be produced.

The Catalyst program clearly showed that Queensland has chosen the wrong horse when they legislated against UCG in favor of CSM. Not only may they pay the price in electoral terms they have also lost huge potential revenues as several currently based UCG plays are moving out to South Australia and to the Northern Territory.... and this is where CTP comes into the story....

CTP found around a trillion tons of UCG suitable coal in its Northern Territory leases.... These are deep, thick coal seams that are ideal for UCG.... And using Linc Energy's proven UCG-GTL (Gas to liquids process) 1t of coal = 1.5 - 2 barrels of oil equivalent for $28 per barrel....

And my guess is that one of the Qld UCG plays have started to have a very close look. My bet is that it is LNC taking the closest interest but Carbon Energy or Cougar could also be in the running.



Read about Australia's pathway to liquid fuel independence here at www.ucg-gtl.com

 

Disclaimer: The author of this post, may or may not be a shareholder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. No company mentioned has sponsored or paid for this content. Comments on this forum should never be taken as investment advice.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-28-2011, 02:30 PM
Alexis
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparty View Post
It looks like CTP is starting to run hard. No new news but I think that the re-run of the ABC's Catalyst program that compared Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) to Coal Seam Methane (CSM) with all of its problems with underground water depletion has got people thinking about the relative merits of UCG.

UCG not only doesn't have to extract literally millions of liters of salty underground water and the consequent risks to the local farmers land when it is dumped into evaporation ponds and to the Great Artesian Basin itself and the known effects on the local water table, UCG also provides for a much more efficient and less costly utilisation of the coal itself.

CSM extraction is said to use less than 5% of the coals' energy whereas UCG uses around 98% of the coals' energy. This coupled with the ability to vary the input air mix into the burn chamber also means that different gas mixes can be produced.

The Catalyst program clearly showed that Queensland has chosen the wrong horse when they legislated against UCG in favor of CSM. Not only may they pay the price in electoral terms they have also lost huge potential revenues as several currently based UCG plays are moving out to South Australia and to the Northern Territory.... and this is where CTP comes into the story....

CTP found around a trillion tons of UCG suitable coal in its Northern Territory leases.... These are deep, thick coal seams that are ideal for UCG.... And using Linc Energy's proven UCG-GTL (Gas to liquids process) 1t of coal = 1.5 - 2 barrels of oil equivalent for $28 per barrel....

And my guess is that one of the Qld UCG plays have started to have a very close look. My bet is that it is LNC taking the closest interest but Carbon Energy or Cougar could also be in the running.



Read about Australia's pathway to liquid fuel independence here at www.ucg-gtl.com
The major problem with Central is that this coal is landlocked. While LNC's SA project at Orroroo is better located and closer to existing infrastructure (power, rail, port, etc.).

The other problem is deeper coal seams of Central. Linc and Carbon say drilling at 500m+ could increase costs per GJ energy, however partially compensated by thicker seams of CTP (20m+).

 

Disclaimer: The author of this post, may or may not be a shareholder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. No company mentioned has sponsored or paid for this content. Comments on this forum should never be taken as investment advice.

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-29-2011, 12:20 AM
Sparty Sparty is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,765
Default Hello Alexsis

Hi,
The deeper the burn chamber the more modifiable the resultant gases and UCG doesn't need a lot of drill holes like CSM.

I talked with John Heugh a year or so ago about distances... he thought that as the UCG-GTL process would produce barrels of oil equivalent trucking to the railway wasn't going to be much of a problem.

I like LNC's prospects and their SA coal but in the years to come adding trillions of tons of CTP coal would make them a 100 year company...

What I wonder is why Australia isn't moving more rapidly down the ucg-gtl pathway to liquid fuel independence. It seems to make little sense to encourage risky, very expensive, very deep water drilling of Tasmania when we have a demonstrated solution.

I own LNC and CTP etc

 

Disclaimer: The author of this post, may or may not be a shareholder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. No company mentioned has sponsored or paid for this content. Comments on this forum should never be taken as investment advice.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.