4.7 Article

The prospects for coal-to-liquid conversion: A general equilibrium analysis

Journal

ENERGY POLICY
Volume 39, Issue 9, Pages 4713-4725

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.056

Keywords

Energy supply; Climate policy; General equilibrium

Funding

  1. BP-MIT
  2. U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency
  3. Consortium of industry and foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigate the economics of coal-to-liquid (CTL) conversion, a polygeneration technology that produces liquid fuels, chemicals, and electricity by coal gasification and Fischer-Tropsch process. CTL is more expensive than extant technologies when producing the same bundle of output. In addition, the significant carbon footprint of CTL may raise environmental concerns. However, as petroleum prices rise, this technology becomes more attractive especially in coal-abundant countries such as the U.S. and China. Furthermore, including a carbon capture and storage (CCS) option could greatly reduce its CO2 emissions at an added cost. To assess the prospects for CTL, we incorporate the engineering data for CTL from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) into the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model, a computable general equilibrium model of the global economy. Based on DOE's plant design that focuses mainly on liquid fuels production, we find that without climate policy, CTL has the potential to account for up to a third of the global liquid fuels supply by 2050 and at that level would supply about 4.6% of global electricity demand. A tight global climate policy, on the other hand, severely limits the potential role of the CTL even with the CCS option, especially if low-carbon biofuels are available. Under such a policy, world demand for petroleum products is greatly reduced, depletion of conventional petroleum is slowed, and so the price increase in crude oil is less, making CTL much less competitive. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available