Microbial corrosion of coal seam gas wells

In March 2019 EIN Presswire published an article on corrosion in Queensland's coal seam gas wells...

It had been at this link https://www.einnews.com/pr_news/480473562/xpand-able-patches-to-extend-the-life-of-corroded-csg-wells-in-queensland-australia

Microbiologically-influenced #corrosion seems to be systemic in the region (Queensland), and other operators might encounter similar issues in their #CSG wells.”— Charles Albouyhttps://t.co/nAuJINKGFu#AUSpol #Pilliga #NatGas #Fracking

— 💧GasBan #WaterIsLife (@OzGasBan) May 7, 2019

The now-deleted article included -

---

Xpandable Patches to extend the life of corroded CSG wells in Queensland, Australia

Charles Albouy, EINPresswire.com

• Full-covered Xpandable Patches successfully isolated bacterial corrosion in coal seam gas wells;
• Microbiologically-influenced corrosion seems to be systemic in the region, and other operators might encounter similar issues in their CSG wells.

Saltel Industries was approached in 2016 by one of Australia’s leading natural gas producers, to tailor a solution for their unusual problem: in some of their CSG wells in Queensland, the 7in production casing must cope with severe and localized external corrosion, developing at shallow depth. These corrosion cases are suspected to be caused by bacteria growing under specific pressure and temperature environments. ...

The corrosion damage can occur at very shallow depths (e.g., as little as a few metres below the wellhead), and corrosion damage can leave less than 80% of the casing metal thickness. In this situation, traditional patch setting methods that require high-pulling or explosive alternatives are complicated and risky for the casing and involve serious HSE downhole hazards. ...

---

Fossil fuel industry opposes innovation

The World Coal Association ignores innovations to reduce electricity prices, raise efficiency and reduce emissions.

Technology now available allows reliable electricity to be generated with just one-third of the coal burned in "High Efficiency, Low Emission" (HELE) coal-fired power plants.

If each bag and balloon represents the energy in 20 million tonnes of coal, and Australia burns 60 million tonnes of coal / yr to produce electricity at present...
That electricity could be generated with just 20 million tonnes of coal combined with hydrogen to produce methane. pic.twitter.com/hxVuBCD75M

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) October 5, 2018

By 2030 utilities would have to cut 2/3 of the coal they burn now to hold global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The cut is more than twice as steep as the boldest scenario outlined by the International Energy Agency. https://t.co/UyDjjfYl9p

— Janae Steville (@StevilleJanae) October 1, 2018

The World Coal Association had called for investment in development of technology for cleaner coal in 2015. Now that technology is available, the World Coal Association has slammed a moratorium on its use.

In 2015 the @WorldCoal Association called for investment in "cleaner coal" technology. https://t.co/j0XjHV0cCP
Now the new technology is available, @WorldCoal has imposed an anti-development moratorium on it. #Innovation stalled for clean coal

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) October 3, 2018

The Luddites over at @WorldCoal are still hiding from innovation that raises efficiency of coal-derived electricity energy generation. They want higher prices, not improved efficiency @chriskkenny #KennyOnSunday https://t.co/KK92EDxY4E

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) September 17, 2018

The natural gas industry also opposes innovations to reduce energy bills and avoid the need for ever more costly drilling and fracking.

Ever done a financial analysis on producing methane from hydrogen and carbon?
Brown coal about 50 cents / GJ, hydrogen from renewable energy at times when supply outstrips demand. https://t.co/1AQTpOkwhS

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) September 13, 2018

Beyond HELE - thermal power generation technology

Carbon from many different substances can be combined with hydrogen to produce methane.
When methane is used to fuel an Ultrahigh Temperature Gas Turbine Combined Cycle power station, carbon dioxide emissions are 310 grams per kilowatt-hour.

The amount of carbon needed for each kilowatt-hour from any power station can be calculated if the carbon dioxide intensity is known. Each 44 grams of carbon dioxide contain 12 grams of carbon. The other 32 grams are oxygen.

The Ultrahigh Temperature Gas Turbine Combined Cycle power station needs methane made with 310 x (12 / 44) grams of carbon for each kilowatt-hour of electricity. That is 85 grams of carbon for each kilowatt-hour.

Some other power station technologies need a lot more carbon for each kilowatt-hour of electricity generated.

When coal is used to fuel a high-efficiency low-emission "HELE" ultra-supercritical coal-fired power station, carbon dioxide emissions are 900 grams per kilowatt-hour. The amount of carbon in the coal needed for each kilowatt-hour of electricity generated is 900 x (12 / 44) grams. That is 245 grams of carbon for each kilowatt-hour.

Some other common materials contain carbon that can be used to produce methane.

Each 28 grams of waste polyethylene plastic (C2H4)n contain 24 grams of carbon and 4 grams of hydrogen.

Each kilogram of wheat straw with about 7% moisture content is made of 48% cellulose by weight (of which carbon is 44%) and 25% is lignin by weight (of which carbon is 65%) ... (((1000 x (48 / 100) x (44 / 100)) + (1000 x (25 / 100) x (65 / 100))). That is 374 grams of carbon in each kilogram.

Choosing whether to burn 245 grams of carbon in coal or just 85 grams of carbon in methane to produce each kilowatt-hour of electricity seems to have only one obvious answer.

The World Coal Association simply refuses to answer this question.

Representatives of the gas industry also refuse to answer this question.

So-called "intermittent" renewable energy can be used in two or more ways to make synthetic methane from any material (straw, waste plastic, coal, etc) containing carbon.

One way is to use renewable energy when supply exceeds demand to power a plasma gasifier.

Another way is to use renewable energy to produce hydrogen by electrolysis of water - and combine that hydrogen with carbon from one or more sources.

As well as industry refusing to answer simple questions about innovation, the Australian Government tries to sell gas exploration rights to the gas industry even though this old method of obtaining natural gas - which is mostly methane - is no longer needed.

Minister Canavan @mattjcan announcing 2018 Offshore Petroleum Exploration Acreage Release at @APPEACONFERENCE in #Adelaide. For more information on the 21 areas open for bidding at https://t.co/H4lWkS1n3m #APPEA2018 #EnergySecurity #Investment pic.twitter.com/zPX9wtTR8i

— Dept of Industry: Resources (@ResourcesGovAu) May 15, 2018

The Western Australian Government is also reviewing this obsolete method of obtaining methane in considering whether to sell "fracking" rights over large swathes of Western Australia.

Climate experts crowd WA Parliament to call for fracking ban https://t.co/nsPL3fzr1x via @watoday

— Emma Young (@Emma_J_Young) September 18, 2018

---

Small-scale biomass gasifiers are one more renewable energy generation option for Australian farms that need affordable, reliable 24 hour a day electricity supplies. For example, a seller on Alibaba in China has a biomass gasifier offered for $500 - $1,000 per unit.

Snowy Hydro 2.0 has competition

There are many ways to store renewable energy.

A problem with Snowy Hydro 2.0 is that it won't work without a large investment in additional 'poles and wires'. This is needed to move renewable energy to the centralised storage facility and to deliver it to consumers when needed. This very large outlay will add to already high electricity prices in Australia.

Another option reduces the need for spending on 'poles and wires' and cuts electricity prices: installing energy storage along-side solar PV systems owned by electricity consumers. See Affordable reliable electricity the easy way for a discussion on this option.

A different option for energy storage has even more advantages...

The Australian Government and other coal lobbyists express concerns with a fifty percent renewable energy target such as the one proposed by the Australian Labor Party:

"50% Renewable Energy by 2030 ...The Climate Change Authority has found that for Australia to achieve its bipartisan agreement to limit global warming by less than 2°C, renewable energy will need to comprise at least half of Australia’s electricity generation by 2030." 

Opponents make claims such as:

"Labor’s energy policy to deliver $200 bill shock ...Labor’s policy of a 50 per cent ­renewable energy target by 2030 would require the closure of 75 per cent of existing coal-fired power in Australia."

It's not as challenging a problem as some people think. Instead of using renewable energy to pump water uphill in a Snowy Hydro 2.0, it can be converted to despatchable fuel in two steps:

1. Produce hydrogen by electrolysis of water.
2. Use the hydrogen from the first step to manufacture methane from brown coal. 

The resulting fuel contains 50% renewable energy and 50% fossil fuel energy. If biomass was gasified in place of the coal, the fuel would be 100% renewable, despatchable energy.

The advantages include:

• There is no need for fracking to produce coal seam gas.
• There is no shortage of natural gas for the domestic market.
• Inefficient old brown coal power stations that produce over 1,100 kilograms of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour are replaced by efficient combined-cycle gas turbine power stations that produce only 330 kilograms of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour. 

The reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from over 1,100 kilograms to just 330 kilograms per megawatt-hour points to a fairly remarkable benefit:

• For Snowy Hydro 2.0 only about 2 megawatt-hours of renewable energy are returned for each 3 megawatt-hours of renewable energy that are stored... 
• Carbon in brown coal is only being converted into electricity at an efficiency of about 25% in existing coal-fired power stations.
• After this carbon is used to make methane with hydrogen from renewable energy, it is converted into electricity with an efficiency of 60% in combined cycle gas turbine power stations. 
• This change means the amount of coal needed for the same amount of electricity is cut by over 70%. Output is increased, not reduced in this option.

E.on launches power-to-gas plant
The unit uses wind power to run electrolysis equipment that transforms water into hydrogen

The conversion of coal and biomass into high energy synthetic gases suitable for use as fuels focused attention on the hydrogasification reaction: C + 2H2 ⇄ CH4.

Because this reaction is highly exothermic and requires the presence of hydrogen, it has been suggested that it be integrated with endothermic hydrogen-producing reactions such as the steam/carbon gasification reaction, C + H20 ⇄ C0 + H2, and the methane/steam reforming reaction, CH4 + H20 ⇄ C0 + 3H2, to conserve heat and reduce the amount of hydrogen which must be provided.

It has been found that this can be done by reacting the coal or other carbonaceous material with steam and hydrogen in a hydrogasification zone to produce a methane-rich gas, passing at least a portion of this gas stream through a methane reforming zone where it is contacted with steam to reduce part of the methane and form hydrogen, and then recycling hydrogen and carbon monoxide recovered from the steam reformer overhead gas to the hydrogasification zone.

Coal char or other carbonaceous solids are circulated between the hydrogasification and reforming zones to provide heat integration.

Renewable natural gas

The Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association - "the voice of [one part of] Australia's oil and gas industry" - held its annual conference in Perth recently. The Twitter feed about the conference is under hash tag #APPEA2017

Approaches for increasing the supply of natural gas were on the agenda, but renewable energy production of natural gas didn't get a mention. The absence of Bioenergy Australia which is holding a Bioenergy Business Breakfast in Adelaide next week left the struggling oil and gas industry bereft of a host of ideas to address the intractable problem of rising costs of extracting natural gas. The problem it faces is that there aren't any more low-cost natural gas reserves to exploit.

New methods for producing natural gas from renewable energy are being developed and refined, continually lowering costs and improving efficiency.

At the same time:

1. The cost of extracting coal seam gas is constantly increasing.
   
2. The domestic price of natural is continuing to rise.

   

   The wholesale price of natural gas in Australia has risen steeply

These factors are making it more commercially attractive to produce natural gas from renewable energy. 

There are 3 underlying processes for making renewable natural gas no matter how the various technologies achieve them:

1. Carbon dioxide can be converted into carbon-containing compounds and oxygen by algae and other plants using sunlight to drive photosynthesis.
   
    
2. Carbon dioxide can also be converted into natural gas and water using hydrogen produced from electrolysis of water using electricity from renewable energy generation. Oxygen is produced as a by-product as in the first process.
    
3. Any carbon-containing compounds including those produced by algae and plants in the first process described above along with farm waste and municipal waste, can be converted into a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide. About half the carbon in the input feed stock is converted into methane, and the other half into carbon dioxide. After the carbon dioxide produced as a by-product is separated, it can be converted into methane by recycling it into either of the first two processes. No "carbon capture and storage" required, avoiding a susbstantial cost of using natural gas from fossil fuel reserves.
    
• Long established technologies use methane-producing bacteria that create methane and carbon dioxide in anaerobic fermentation ponds or tanks.
• More recently plants have become available that use supercritical water as a gasification medium to create methane and carbon dioxide. These complete the gasification process more quickly and so don't need large tanks where methane-producing bacteria gradually transform the feed stock. This newer technology is especially well-suited for wet feed stock as there is no need to dry it.

  Making renewable natural gas from wet biomass, no #CSG -
  1/ https://t.co/cbAnvLLgQi
  2/ https://t.co/bA1a1XcUY1
  3/ https://t.co/Xyy79DHFEo

  — Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) 3 April 2017

  Waste and cheap coal in hot water. The produced gas is rich in hydrogen. Reforming in supercritical water. #energy https://t.co/Og47qUDG8Y

  — Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) June 17, 2017

These more recent technologies can also efficiently convert low-grade coal with high moisture content into natural gas. Existing coal-fired power could use this option to improve efficiency and lower emissions until it is feasible to decommission them.

Researchers at ENN Group, China and Carleton University, Canada recently investigated supercritical water lignite gasification technology. See "Coal-based Clean Energy Production", Advances in Energy Engineering (AEE) Volume 1 Issue 4, October 2013.

Supercritical Water gasification of wet biomass and low-grade coal

More recently the Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland, completed an assessment of the option of Australia becoming a major exporter of renewable energy to Asia - making use of the Queensland LNG export facilities - to ship natural gas made with renewable energy. See "Can Australia Power the Energy-Hungry Asia with Renewable Energy?"

Improving old coal-fired power stations

Existing coal-fired power stations using low-grade coal might continue to generate particulate and sulphur dioxide emissions until they are decommissioned. Some are fitted with scrubbers and other post-combustion filters to reduce these emissions. This approach reduces the efficiency of already inefficient coal-fired power stations:

The heating value of Indian coal is, on average, about 60 percent of the heating value of coal burned in the United States. This increases the amount of coal that must be burned to generate a given heat input, implying higher auxiliary electricity consumption to run coal grinding equipment, conveyors, and pumps.

Auxiliary generation... will also increase if electricity is used to run pollution abatement equipment, such as electrostatic precipitators ( ESPs ) and flue-gas desulfurization units ( scrubbers ) . We note although coal-fired power plants in both countries have ESPs, only three plants in India currently have scrubbers.¹

In the meantime there are options to increase efficiency and reduce harmful emissions until it is feasible to decommission these coal-fired power stations.

One of these options is to pre-process the low-grade coal before combustion. The technology available to do this has several advantages. It eliminates the particulate and sulphur dioxide emissions and, more importantly, increases the efficiency of these coal-fired power stations. Scrubbers and other post-combustion filters are no longer needed.

Low-grade coal contains relatively high levels of contaminants and moisture content. The moisture content reduces the energy available for power generation when its burned because energy is wasted converting the moisture into water vapour. The contaminants increase the energy that is used to run pollution abatement equipment.

To understand the available technology this simplified model gives a reasonable approximation of what takes place; Consider a process in which carbon and water are placed in a reaction vessel and an environment is created to promote a desired reaction that uses little or no external energy. The reaction breaks down some of the water into oxygen and hydrogen. The oxygen reacts with half of the carbon to form carbon dioxide and the hydrogen reacts with the remainder of the carbon to create methane. The energy released by the reactions with carbon provide the energy needed to break down water  into oxygen and hydrogen.

The methane can be separated to use in place of low-grade coal in the existing coal-fired power stations. There are no particulates or sulphur dioxide to be removed from the exhaust gases. When methane burns, about half the energy is produced by the reaction of carbon with oxygen to produce carbon dioxide, and about half is produced by the reaction of hydrogen with oxygen to form water vapour. Note that the total amount of energy is the same as would have been produced if all of the carbon had been burned and not pre-processed into carbon dioxide and methane. The moisture content that was present in the low-grade coal has been separated, as water, before combustion. No energy is wasted converting that moisture into water vapour.

Research on this technology was conducted in several countries interested in producing methane from biomass that contains significant amounts of water. That research has advanced into at least three commercially available products. These can be adapted to carry out the desired pre-processing of low-grade coal into methane:

Making renewable natural gas from wet biomass, no #CSG -
1/ https://t.co/cbAnvLLgQi
2/ https://t.co/bA1a1XcUY1
3/ https://t.co/Xyy79DHFEo

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) April 3, 2017

Upgrading low-grade coal to methane

---

1 Chan, Hei Sing (Ron), Maureen L. Cropper, and Kabir Malik. 2014. "Why Are Power Plants in India Less Efficient Than Power Plants in the United States?" American Economic Review, 104(5): 586-90. DOI: 10.1257/aer.104.5.586

Commercial viability of coal seam gas

Australian coal seam gas is expensive to extract: about $4 to $5 a gigajoule. 

Rising cost of extracting coal seam gas

 The U.S. wholesale gas price is only $3 a gigajoule.

U.S. natural gas price

One option for increasing the natural gas supply in Australia, though it isn't the preferred option, is to import LNG from the U.S. 
The point to take away from this is that coal seam gas in Australia, facing competition from the U.S. that is rapidly expanding its LNG export capacity, is unlikely to be commercially viable within a few years. 

Expanding the unconventional gas industry that  has little prospect of long-term commercial viability isn't a good investment.

Another option for increasing the supply of natural gas is to make it from coal. Black coal in Australia is being sold into an over-supplied export market where the price is falling to around $2 a gigajoule.

Brown coal costs only about 50 cents a gigajoule.

 
New processes are available that can make methane from coal relatively cleanly. 

Supercritical Water (SCW) gasification of coal and wet biomass

 Coal mixed with water and heated to 400 centigrade with solar thermal energy reacts to form approximately equal quantities of carbon dioxide and natural gas. 
Another way to heat the mixture is to add hydrogen produced by wind turbines or solar PV systems. With sufficient hydrogen, all of the carbon in the mixture reacts with the hydrogen to form natural gas and no carbon dioxide is created.

Practical Energy

The requirement statement for practical energy -

What can be done collectively to ensure reliable, affordable and clean energy? https://t.co/5JmelgXzIF

— IEA (@IEA) April 12, 2017

The answer is surprisingly simple.

There are 4 or 5 processes that do more-or-less the same thing in slightly different ways. Each was designed with a different purpose in mind, but that doesn't mean they can't be used for other purposes the designers hadn't considered.

Bioenergy, waste-to-energy, renewable energy storage as synthetic natural gas, biogas and synthetic natural gas from coal are different ways of doing the same thing.

Synthetic natural gas can be used to store energy, to generate electricity on demand, and as feedstock in manufacturing processes. Synthetic natural gas can also be manufactured for export in the form of LNG.

It can be made from 100 percent renewable energy, 100 percent fossil fuel energy, or some combination of both renewable and fossil energy. This allows a transition to a 100 percent renewable energy future, achieving the  above requirement statement: ensuring reliable, affordable and clean energy.

The underlying process combines carbon dioxide, water and energy to create methane and oxygen:

CO₂ + 2H₂O → CH₄ + 2O₂

• Photosynthesis by plants and algae to create biomass that methanogenic bacteria convert to methane is one way of doing this with solar energy.
• Waste-to-energy can use methanogenic bacteria to produce methane using the solar energy embedded in the waste.  
• Electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen that is reacted with carbon dioxide to make methane is another way of doing this with solar PV systems and wind turbines.
• Biomass can be converted to methane in high temperature superheated water reactors. The thermal energy to do this can be from concentrated solar thermal energy, or from reaction with either oxygen or hydrogen created by electrolysis of water.
• Biomass can be converted to methane in very high temperature gasifiers that create carbon monoxide and hydrogen that is reacted in a separate step to create methane. The energy for this high temperature process can be obtained by burning a portion of the feedstock in air. 

In each of the above processes that use biomass to produce methane, coal can be used in place of some or all of biomass.

When there is sufficient solar PV and wind turbine generating capacity, hydrogen can be produced whenever electricity supply exceeds demand. This hydrogen can be reacted with carbon dioxide to make methane for generating electricity whenever demand exceeds the supply.

With sufficient renewable energy generating capacity, synthetic natural gas can be manufactured for export - providing completely renewable energy to importing countries via existing LNG export, transport and import infrastructure.

Curiously, coal is presently being converted to synthetic natural gas in the most environmentally 'unfriendly' option available - burning a portion of the coal in air to create carbon monoxide and hydrogen that is reacted in a separate step to create methane. This technology has been criticised for its high level of carbon dioxide emissions and water usage.

Coal could be converted to methane by reacting it with hydrogen produced by electrolysis of water with electricity from solar PV systems and wind turbines. It can also be converted to methane in high temperature superheated water reactors. The thermal energy to do this can be from concentrated solar thermal energy, or from reaction with hydrogen created by the electrolysis of water.

This is most suitable for low-grade lignite such as that found in Yallourn Valley in Australia that consists of 50 percent or more water. With this process it can be converted to high-value synthetic natural gas, avoiding the need for coal seam gas.

Its use can be gradually phased-out as renewable energy generating capacity increases to the stage where it can completely replace it.

---

Renewable natural gas can turns organic waste into usable fuel. An ideal use? Large trucks. #sustainability https://t.co/blouS4fZZ5 pic.twitter.com/jMSne5nRk8

— UPS Public Affairs (@UPSPolicy) April 17, 2017

Production of synthetic natural gas (SNG) by hydrothermal gasification of wet biomass https://t.co/qJyOyZw9rr

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) February 26, 2017

Making renewable natural gas from wet biomass, no #CSG -
1/ https://t.co/cbAnvLLgQi
2/ https://t.co/bA1a1XcUY1
3/ https://t.co/Xyy79DHFEo

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) April 3, 2017

Taking the blinkers off energy policy in Australia

The "Resources and Energy Quarterly" by the Office of the Chief Economist for March 2017 has the following Table of Contents:

Contents

Foreword	4
About this edition	5
Resource and energy overview	6
Steel	25
Iron ore	33
Metallurgical coal	42
Thermal coal	51
Gas	61
Oil	73
Uranium	82
Gold	89
Aluminium, alumina and bauxite	97
Copper	113
Nickel	121
Zinc	127
Trade summary charts	133
Appendix	142

Renewable energy doesn't get a mention.

This oversight is the foundation on which opportunities for Australia's economic development are missed.

Two of the energy resources that are included - thermal coal and natural gas - are shown to have outlooks that aren't very promising in the case of coal and are at risk from high domestic production costs and low-cost competition in the case of gas.

Thermal coal exports for example are shown to decline in value by $5 billion per year to about $15 billion per year, though volumes are supposed to remain the same. Not all Australian coal mines will be commercially viable with this outlook that is actually describing export prices falling by 25 percent.

Natural gas exports as LNG are shown to have a large increase in capacity coming onstream at the same time as an even greater increase in U.S. LNG export capacity - with the U.S. exporters able to source feed gas at much lower prices than Australian exporters.

The quarterly report makes a courageous projection of rising volumes and value of Australian LNG exports even though noting some daunting obstacles:

• Australia is not immune from supply-side competition. The United States will make the largest contribution to new capacity. The cost competitiveness of US exporters will largely be determined by the cost of their domestic gas, for which the reference price is Henry Hub. Henry Hub prices averaged US$3.0 per million British thermal units over the first quarter of 2017 (A$3.80 a gigajoule). 
• While Australia's LNG exports are projected to rise, the capacity utilisation of Australian LNG export projects is expected to decline. The price competitiveness of Australian producers is one factor affecting the outlook for exports. Proximity to Asia will be an advantage, although the Panama Canal expansion in 2016 has lowered shipping costs from the US.
•  A large cost for Australia's LNG plants is feed gas. The three LNG export terminals on the east coast — which are largely fed by CSG from Queensland’s Surat and Bowen basins — tend to have relatively high costs for feed gas. Unlike LNG ventures using gas from conventional reservoirs, LNG operators on the east coast will need to drill hundreds of new wells each year to maintain CSG production, with costs of over a million dollars per well.

Australia has an advantage with ample renewable energy resources to overcome the poor outlook for coal and the high-risk outlook for natural gas.

With the price of coal projected to decline to about $2 per gigajoule, and the cost of coal-seam gas likely to exceed the export price of LNG from US exporters, it is increasingly attractive, if not imperative, to export natural gas made from cheap coal and renewable energy.

Several processes are available to achieve this.

The bottom line is that these processes change 1 gigajoule of coal valued at perhaps $2 into 4 gigajoules of natural gas worth $32 by adding 3 gigajoules of renewable energy.

---

Available systems to make synthetic natural gas from cheap wet lignite and brown coal

Production of synthetic natural gas (SNG) by hydrothermal gasification of wet biomass https://t.co/qJyOyZw9rr

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) February 26, 2017

Making renewable natural gas from wet biomass, no #CSG -
1/ https://t.co/cbAnvLLgQi
2/ https://t.co/bA1a1XcUY1
3/ https://t.co/Xyy79DHFEo

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) April 3, 2017

---

Trump Approves Natural Gas Export Terminal In Bid For Energy Dominance https://t.co/dwp9Csq1PX#tcot #MakeAmericaGreatAgain #AGW #natgas

— Andrew Follett (@AndrewCFollett) April 25, 2017

Energy Secretary says project will create 45K jobs, US world's dominant LNG exporter. Natural gas. https://t.co/1Tse5lGyo7 #auspol #springst

— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) April 26, 2017

High priced natural gas from bargain priced coal

GreatPoint Energy produces clean, low cost natural gas from coal, petroleum coke, and biomass utilizing its bluegas™ catalytic hydromethanation process.

Carbon plus water producing methane plus carbon dioxide

GreatPoint Energy's coal gasification technology appeals to China because it allows them to keep using cheap domestic coal, but in a much cleaner manner.

In 2012, GreatPoint announced a $1.25 billion deal to build the first of 34 coal gasification plants in a remote, coal-rich part of China.

The total project will cost an estimated $20 - 25 billion and will supply one trillion cubic feet of natural gas a year.

This represents a massive leap in the scale of domestic production for China, which last year produced only 107 billion cubic feet of natural gas.

The deal includes an equity investment of $420 million, the largest ever by a Chinese corporation into a venture-capital-funded U.S. company.

.@SkiPoss @doyleclan1 @luisbaram Large scale natural gas plant example: http://t.co/8HaHDDJmBq Biogas upgrade: http://t.co/odH50YJOJ3
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) July 13, 2014

.@nswre A new name: "Carbon Capture, Use and Storage." High-value algae production needs reliable CO2 supply. https://t.co/2sBdz9oHOp #CCS
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) August 25, 2014

Reviewing a renewable energy target

The Abbott Government recently announced a review of Australia's Renewable Energy Target.

A briefing paper contains a mind-boggling fact:

Coal in Australia is worth about $1.50 per gigajoule.
Natural gas is worth about $9.00 per gigajoule.

See -
RET Review
Modelling assumptions workshop ACIL Allen Consulting
Stakeholder workshop
Presenters: Paul Hyslop / Owen Kelp / Guy Dundas
Date: 23 April 2014

Questions:

1. Why burn coal when it can be increased six-fold in value by converting it to natural gas?
2. Why drill coal seam gas wells all over the place when you can make natural gas from coal worth about one-sixth of the value of natural gas?

More natural gas with no coal seam gas. http://t.co/7Sk4mn7kSm #coal #csg
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) August 17, 2014

The ACIL Allen Consulting figures under-estimate the cost of coal. This biases the RET review in favour of coal.

The estimate of $2 per gigajoule of thermal coal in NSW (about 25 gigajoules per tonne) requires a price of just $50 per tonne. The current price of NSW thermal coal however is closer to $80 per tonne or $3.20 per gigajoule.

Gas and coal prices

Natural gas and coal prices used in 2013 emissions projections work

Source:
ACIL Allen Consulting, Electricity Sector Emissions:
Modelling of the Australian Electricity Generation Sector, September 2013

Government fumbles energy policy

In December 2013 the Abbott Government released an Energy Policy issues paper.

"The Energy White Paper will set out a coherent and integrated approach to energy policy to reduce cost pressures on households and businesses, improve Australia's international competitiveness and grow our export base and economic prosperity."

---

Electricity and gas bills hurt family budgets. Abbott fails to prepare energy policy http://t.co/32WbK8Gmrs #auspol pic.twitter.com/OS0tvdh0si
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) September 2, 2014

Manufacturing jobs predicted to collapse under soaring natural gas price. http://t.co/NUpsxLTB4J #auspol #ausunions
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) August 12, 2014

#qldpol Get ready for higher gas bills: LNG exports expected to drive up domestic prices: http://t.co/V2SrsCLGns via @YouTube
— David Marler (@Qldaah) August 30, 2014

---

The Terms of Reference began -

The Australian Government has committed to a set of signature economy-wide reforms to grow the economy while addressing rising business and household costs.
The Australian Government is committed to working closely with industry and state and territory governments in the development of an integrated, coherent national energy policy.

The issues to be considered in the Energy White Paper were -

• policy and regulatory reform to secure reliable, competitively and transparently priced energy for a growing population and productive economy, including the efficiency and effectiveness of regulatory bodies;
• the appropriate role for government in the energy sector;
• opportunities to drive the more productive and efficient use of energy;
• energy related distribution infrastructure to deliver efficient national markets;
• alternative transport fuel sources;
• workforce issues, including national skills development needs;
• emerging energy technologies and new energy sources; and
• future growth in exports of energy products, including our world leading services industries.

A Green Paper will be released for consultation in May 2014.
The Energy White Paper will be completed in September 2014.

The timetable set out was -

The Energy White Paper will be led by the Department of Industry. 
An Issues Paper will be released by mid December 2013 to initiate consultation. 
A Green Paper will be released for consultation in May 2014. 
The Energy White Paper will be completed in September 2014. 

---

High gas prices threaten thousands of jobs, billions of dollars: industry

ABC News | 21 July 2014

With energy prices soaring and threatening jobs, manufacturing, mining and agriculture, the Government has delayed the release of the energy policy Green Paper. It was not completed in May. The White Paper - due to be completed in September 2014 - has also been delayed.

Why #frack and drill for #csg when you can make natural gas from coal worth one-sixth of the value of natural gas? http://t.co/p5CfaHDiPq
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) August 9, 2014

---

According to the Industry Department web site in July 2014 -

The Energy Policy Green paper is now expected to be released in August.
Further submissions will be sought on the release of this paper.
It will be December before the Energy White Paper is released.

---

@tautechnical and still electricity prices soar! But we know the shareholders,company directors and LNP are the only winners!
— Anne Frandi-Coory (@afcoory) August 13, 2014

---

Submissions by special interest groups include -

The Minerals Council of Australia - February 2014

Low cost, reliable energy has been a critical element of the international competitiveness of Australian industry and the living standards of households for several decades. The central role of low cost reliable coal in electricity generation has been the primary contributor to this competitive edge.

But this advantage has been lost, with electricity prices now amongst the highest in the developed world, substantially due to ill-judged policy interventions. High energy costs represent a substantial burden on Australian households and industry, including the mining sector which accounted for 13.5 per cent of final energy consumption in 2011-12.

These policy mistakes should be reversed including by:

• Urgent repeal of the carbon tax, which should lead to an immediate 9 per cent decrease in energy costs.
• The phasing out of the Renewable Energy Target, which represents a $20 to $30 billion subsidy to the renewable sector by 2030, with the cost borne by industrial users and households.

The Government should also recognise that costly efforts to change the energy mix ignore the substantial gains in low emissions technologies from traditional energy sources. Australia does not have to choose between coal and a low emissions future.

The roadmap to a low emissions coal future is increasingly clear. ...

Comment: The "roadmap" to a low emissions coal future is increasingly clear.
It is costly and relies on technology that is obsolete.
See: "The Coal Lobby Scores an Own Goal"

---

.@SarahJaneTasker Coal "experts" take Aus Govt for fools. U.S. and Japan build IGCC plants. Not profligacy. https://t.co/HiNHXr1ey4 #auspol
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) September 5, 2014

---

The Institute of Public Affairs - March 2014

A prominent role in the paper’s terms of reference is given to the supposed need to maintain analytical capability within the government. This Departmental protection goal is an unwarranted priority in the context of the market driven industry the White Paper claims to be championing. ...

...

Comment:
"The market can solve problems I don't understand" - the last refuge of ignorance.

Australians would still be using leaded petrol if their governments had the IPA's faith that "the market" can solve any problem and governments don't need and shouldn't maintain informed policy advice.

It would be unfortunate if the White Paper were to be progressed as though, in the absence of government oversight, energy markets would not develop efficiently. Markets develop from the interactions of consumers with businesses, which seek to sell their goods, access inputs and reduce risks. Governments’ role is to allow these processes to be pursued and to uphold the law.

Rather than a plethora of goals, the White Paper should have a single focus: to allow the market to bring about efficient production of energy with interventions limited to addressing natural monopoly situations. Anything beyond that will ensure the weaknesses presently evident will remain.

...

Australia is likely to have the lowest cost sources of fossil fuel powered electricity generation in the world. These are, most significantly based on almost endless supplies of coal, much of which is conveniently located close to the main load centres. The coal used for local electricity generation has no real alternative uses as it is of too low a quality for profitable export (and in the case of brown coal is not even easily transportable). Australia’s low costs, on current technology, can generate unlimited amounts of base load power at around $35 per MWh.

This is almost certainly the lowest cost power available in large quantity in the world. Other countries have abundant coal reserves but few have them as readily accessible. Alternative energy sources are more expensive. Solar is impossibly so, ...

---

Industry Minister - companies should extract "every molecule" of gas to boost exports

Use it or lose it, miners warned by Coalition 

The Australian | September 18, 2013

David Crowe
Political Correspondent
Canberra

RESOURCE giants will be told to step up their spending on mammoth new projects or risk losing their rights to tap the deposits, under an Abbott government plan to accelerate investment and kill off fears of an end to the boom.

The incoming government aims to use its power over the vast gas deposits to bring forward up to $180 billion in new investment, sending a blunt message to companies to develop rather than hoard the nation's resources.

As Tony Abbott and his ministers prepare to be sworn into office today, the resource plan marks another stage in an economic agenda that promises to lift growth, but will depend on stronger business investment to deliver results.

The policy is also set to reignite debate on the cost burdens - including high salaries - that global companies blame for stalling Australian projects and diverting their investments into cheaper projects in Africa and Asia.

Incoming industry minister Ian Macfarlane told The Australian that companies should extract "every molecule" of gas to boost exports and supply the domestic market.

Incoming industry minister Ian Macfarlane told The Australian that companies should extract "every molecule" of gas to boost exports and supply the domestic market.

Mr Macfarlane warned that companies that shelved their projects could lose the "retention leases" they held over the reserves, given the commonwealth's power to revoke the rights as they came up for renewal over the next few years. "I want to put the industry on notice that if the deposits are able to be developed they've got to be developed," he said yesterday as he arrived in Canberra for briefings.

"We've got to make sure that every molecule of gas that can come out of the ground does so. Provided we've got the environmental approvals right, we should develop everything we can."

The policy is expected to be put into place in coming days as Mr Macfarlane meets officials to review a list of retention leases that expire during this term of parliament, triggering talks with companies over their plans.

The priority is expected to be Woodside Petroleum's enormous Browse project, which is on hold as the company seeks approval from federal and West Australian governments to build an offshore "floating" LNG facility rather than build a hub at James Price Point north of Broome. Woodside's requirements include a variation in the retention leases over the Browse reservoir.

West Australian Premier Colin Barnett objects to the offshore plan on the grounds that more jobs will be created if the gas is pumped through pipes to James Price Point, but Mr Macfarlane supports the floating LNG plan and is preparing for talks to reach a compromise.

"I'd expect Colin to speak up for Western Australia, but I'd expect there to be some middle ground," said Mr Macfarlane, who returns to a portfolio he held during the Howard government.

In his first interview since the election on the outlook for the resources sector, Mr Macfarlane rubbished Kevin Rudd's claims during the election campaign that the "China boom" was ending.

Mr Macfarlane argued instead that Labor had slowed the sector by imposing the carbon tax, the mining tax and a tax on oil condensate, as well as launching personal fights with industry leaders such as Gina Rinehart and Andrew Forrest.

"That whole chapter's been slammed shut," Mr Macfarlane said. "We're opening a new chapter about working with the industry, creating jobs and making Australia an energy superpower."

Companies across the sector are prepared for the talks over project timeframes and their retention leases, given pressure from former Labor resources minister Martin Ferguson to develop their deposits.

Companies across the sector are prepared for the talks over project timeframes and their retention leases, given pressure from former Labor resources minister Martin Ferguson to develop their deposits.

"I want to do this in a structured way so we don't affect our investment profile," Mr Macfarlane said. "We don't want to scare the horses. I've got no targets, no hit list, but no sacred cows and everything is on the table."

The plan to spur investment depends, however, on overcoming cost barriers that companies blame for delaying their plans.

About $200bn is being spent on seven LNG facilities across the country, according to the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association.

Another $180bn would be invested if companies signed off on a further list of projects, according to a study for APPEA by consulting firm McKinsey, although this includes coal-seam gas projects as well as the offshore deposits covered by retention leases.

Chevron Australia managing director Roy Krzywosinski, Origin Energy chief executive Grant King and former Shell Australia country manager Ann Pickard told The Australian in May that "significant national leadership" was needed to speed up projects by lifting productivity and improving industrial relations.

While unions dispute the cost claims, company executives insist that most of their workers in Australia earn more than equivalent workers in the US and that it can be more cost-effective to develop LNG in other countries.

APPEA external affairs director Michael Bradley said urgent steps had to be taken to fix the nation's "sliding international competitiveness".

"It is critical that steps are taken to ensure Australia secures its share of the next wave of global oil and gas projects," Mr Bradley said yesterday.

Mr Macfarlane said the Coalition was acting to cut industry costs by removing taxes that Labor imposed on the industry.

He also intends to work with incoming environment minister Greg Hunt to streamline the green tape that companies must comply with to get environmental approval for their projects.
 

Coal to solve energy poverty? No way!

Nigeria remains the second largest flaring country in the world and emits around $1.8 billion worth of natural gas annually.

Gas Flaring - Disposing of natural gas keeps prices high

But what is more surprising than the eye-popping economic loss is the fact that so much gas is wasted despite the country’s rampant energy poverty.

The entire Nigerian population uses little more grid power than the area immediately surrounding Tokyo’s Narita airport.

---

See Aminu Hassan and Reza Kouhy (2013) Gas flaring in Nigeria: analysis of changes in its consequent carbon emission and reporting, Accounting Forum 37 (2).

Gas Flaring: The Burning Issue

Technology change resisted by energy industry

When workers oppose technology change it is put down to efforts to protect jobs by opposing innovation that boosts productivity.

When industries resist technology change very little comment is heard.

In the energy resources industry new technology boosts efficiency of converting resources into energy. This reduces demand for resources and lowers the cost of energy. It also reduces revenue of the energy resource industry.

The price of natural gas relies both on limiting supply and maintaining demand.

AGL has revealed that it is expanding production of coal seam gas in New South Wales even though it has NOT evaluated new technology able to rapidly and cheaply increase the supply of natural gas. This new method of producing natural gas would lift supply rapidly and suppress the sharp price rises AGL wishes to obtain from NSW consumers.

On 28 April AGL was asked via its community engagement web site about new technology developed since 2008 and that is being used in China to make natural gas from cheap coal. (See Question 1 below)

Two days later AGL gave AN ANSWER, but it was not an answer to the question it was asked. . (See AGL Answer to Question 1 below)

Two follow-up requests to AGL to give an answer to the question actually asked were handled by AGL as follows:

1. The first follow-up request with information of which AGL was evidently unaware was ignored. In addition AGL removed this follow-up request from its web site.... (See Question 2 below)
2. The second follow-up request for an answer taking into account the further information was eventually answered.. (See Question 3 below) AGL's answer is a bald assertion that "coal seam gas production is the best available source to meet the needs of the NSW market".. (See AGL Answer to Question 3 below)

It is clear from the answer AGL gave on 30 April 2014 that it is unaware of the superior technology China has adopted to make natural gas cheaply from coal.. (See AGL Answer to Question 1 below)

AGL is proceeding its push to expand coal seam gas throughout New South Wales without due diligence. This approach is unfortunate:

1. The environmental damage created by coal seam gas is avoidable.
2. The financial return to AGL investors will be diminished by using a technology that is no longer the best available for obtaining a supply of natural gas. 
3. The New South Wales economy will be damaged from the waste of existing coal transport infrastructure, investment in coal mining and loss of jobs. These resources and jobs exist now and can be used to make natural gas.

---

AGL is not the only Gas Giant ignoring new technology

.@abissicus It looks like @SantosLtd wants to raise book value, not use new tech: http://t.co/GQB90rgIoZ @greensjeremy @kangabella @guardian
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) May 15, 2014

---

Coal in decline. Centennial Coal announces job cuts across NSW #coal mines http://t.co/J5EzQqJjOT via @ABCNews #csg
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) May 2, 2014

Coal in decline. Xstrata cuts jobs at Hunter Valley coal mine http://t.co/w0SsDxMlPR via @ABCNews #csg
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) May 2, 2014

Australia's economic challenge. Capital productivity - output per dollar spent on capital expenditure - http://t.co/DtRIdlb6lD #auspol #CoA
— Askgerbil Now (@Askgerbil) May 2, 2014

---

Question 1

From:  Your Say AGL
Date: 28 April 2014 15:41
Subject: Your question on Your Say AGL website
To:  Askgerbil

Hi there,
Thanks for taking the time to visit Your Say AGL and asking us a question.
You asked:

'China is now using GreatPoint Energy's hydromethanation process to make natural gas from cheap coal. With coal prices low and falling, for how long can AGL's coal seam gas remain competitive? Has AGL conducted an evaluation of this new technology?'

We will get back to you as soon as possible with a response.

Regards
AGL

---

AGL Answer to Question 1

From:  Your Say AGL
Date: 30 April 2014 11:21
Subject: Response to your question on Your Say AGL website
To:  Askgerbil
 
Hi there,
Thanks for taking the time to visit Your Say AGL and asking us a question.
You asked:

'China is now using GreatPoint Energy's hydromethanation process to make natural gas from cheap coal. With coal prices low and falling, for how long can AGL's coal seam gas remain competitive? Has AGL conducted an evaluation of this new technology?'

An updated response has now been posted on the site.
Our response:

'Hi Askgerbil, thanks for your question.

Coal seam gas is the best available source to meet the needs of the NSW market, in terms of both production capability and minimising environmental impacts.
The concept of hydromethanation has been in the public domain for decades, however, compared to the process of producing natural gas from coal seams, it has a much larger environmental footprint.
There is also some uncertainty around the technology as the industry is still in the early stages of development.'

Please let us know if you have any more questions or if anything needs to be clarified.

Regards
AGL

---

Question 2

From:  Your Say AGL
Date: 30 April 2014 20:07
Subject: Your question on Your Say AGL website
To:  Askgerbil

Hi there,
Thanks for taking the time to visit Your Say AGL and asking us a question.
You asked:

'Thank you for AGL's view on GreatPoint Energy's technology for making natural gas from coal.

However, the AGL answer (below) is about a "concept in the public domain for decades", and does not answer my question that begins "China is now using GreatPoint Energy's hydromethanation process [patented in the last 5 years] ... "

### AGL's Answer ###
a. "The concept of hydromethanation has been in the public domain for decades"
b. "Compared to the process of producing natural gas from coal seams, it has a much larger environmental footprint."
c. "There is also some uncertainty around the technology as the industry is still in the early stages of development."
###

Please consider an answer to my question, taking into account:
a. GreatPoint Energy's technology is the subject of a collection of patents dating from 2008. It has not been in the public domain for decades.
(Some examples:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/8192716.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2012/0305848.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2013/0042824.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2010/0121125.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2009/0260287.html
)

b. GreatPoint Energy's technology does not have a larger environmental footprint than the process of producing natural gas from coal seams.
See GreatPoint Energy's 2011 video at http://vimeo.com/18745900 | "Nothing goes up the stack into the atmosphere".
(Note that a GreatPoint Energy coal gasification plant built at an existing coal-fired power station would need NO additional infrastructure for coal-mining and transport - having less environmental footprint and capital outlay when compared to a large numbers of coal seam gas wells and above ground pipelines.)

c. GreatPoint Energy's technology is not surrounded by uncertainty and is in commercial use in China.'

We will get back to you as soon as possible with a response.

Regards
AGL

---

Question 3

From:  Your Say AGL
Date: 1 May 2014 09:19
Subject: Your question on Your Say AGL website
To:  Askgerbil

Hi there,
Thanks for taking the time to visit Your Say AGL and asking us a question.
You asked:

'Can AGL add to its answer to my question on GreatPoint Energy's natural gas from coal technology? AGL's first answer only considers an older hydromethanation process and not the specific process developed since 2008 by GreatPoint Energy now being used in China.'

We will get back to you as soon as possible with a response.

Regards
AGL

---

AGL Answer to Question 3

From:  Your Say AGL
Date: 2 May 2014 11:04
Subject: Response to your question on Your Say AGL website
To:  Askgerbil

Hi there,
Thanks for taking the time to visit Your Say AGL and asking us a question.
You asked:

'Can AGL add to its answer to my question on GreatPoint Energy's natural gas from coal technology? AGL's first answer only considers an older hydromethanation process and not the specific process developed since 2008 by GreatPoint Energy now being used in China.'

Our response has now been posted on the site.
Our response:

'Hydromethanation is still in the early stages of development. GreatPoint Energy reports that laboratory and pilot plant tests have shown the process can work for a range of feedstock, which is the driver behind the company’s joint venture to construct a full scale facility in China.
With NSW facing a shortage of gas supply from 2016, coal seam gas production is the best available source to meet the needs of the NSW market.' 

Please let us know if you have any more questions or if anything needs to be clarified.

Regards
Neil - YourSayAGL

---