Patented Technology
CTI has developed a technology to remove toxins from coal before it is burned in a coal-fired power plant, resulting in a clean-burning char which still produces BTU values great enough to generate needed power output. CTI’s technology also produces crude oil, a highly valuable and sellable byproduct. When coal is processed through CTI’s technology, the harmful toxins are drawn out of the coal in the form of vapors. When these vapors are condensed, and cooled, they form crude oil.
In our original tests, CTI has determined it can produce nearly three barrels of oil for every ton of coal processed through our technology. This amount will vary based on the quality of coal processed, how long it is processed, and at what temperature it is heated. After the coal exits our retort, most of the toxins are no longer present and the remaining coal, or char, has roughly a 75% BTU value of the original coal, but weighs 1/3 of the original weight, allowing for more char to be burned at a higher BTU value than the original coal.
One average-sized power plant uses roughly 7,500 tons of coal per day. Supplying an equivalent amount of char to equal a raw coal BTU value would result in CTI’s ability to produce 21,375 barrels of marketable crude oil per day, from just one average-sized power plant. At a price of $45 per barrel of crude oil, that equates to nearly $1MM in revenue per day at each average sized coal-fired power plant.
Company Background
CTI’s patented process pulls liquid, viscous hydrocarbon fluid from coal to be used as a marketable crude oil, while remaining coal "char" still having use similar to traditional coal for energy. Coal liquefaction dates back to the 1920s—The process was used extensively during World War II in making diesel/synthetic fuel and oils. It came into extensive use when South Africa faced a world oil embargo during the nation’s politically driven apartheid in the 1970s and 1980s, and subsequently created the South African Synthetic Oil Ltd. Corporation, or “Sasol.” Sasol at its peak was producing as much as 70 percent of South Africa’s liquid fuel needs. Sasol today converts 120,000 metric tons of coal per day to 150,000 barrels of oil at a ratio of 1.25 barrels of oil per ton of coal, and this corporation is estimated to currently produce approximately 200,000 barrels per day.
CTI’s technology is similar, but there are two significant differences from the coal liquefaction preformed in the 1920s and currently in South Africa. CTI’s patented improvements produce much higher quantities of oil per short ton of coal, and more importantly, its technology is airtight, preventing any emissions from entering the atmosphere. CTI has taken old technology and significantly improved it, resulting in a much greater efficiency and much lower emissions.
In 2000, the current CoalTech, Inc. (CTI) management team was involved in creating Oil Tech, Inc. (OTI), which became a forerunner of CoalTech, Inc. (CTI). OTI was the first company to develop and patent a process to economically produce oil from oil shale ($20.00/bl) without the use of water and, unlike other technologies, the OTI process did not plug the heating column (retort). The OTI technology first crushed the shale to ¼ inch minus, dried the shale to eliminate water, and then processed the dried shale through a 40-foot, oxygen-free heating tower (retort), extracting organic vapor under a slight vacuum which was then condensed into liquid crude oil. OTI was not the first to produce crude oil from oil shale, but learning from the mistakes and problems of earlier technologies, OTI was the first to produce shale oil economically. The success of this system was noted by United States senators and Jack Savage was invited to present the OTI process to a panel of congressmen. While in the process of obtaining a permit to open an oil shale mine on government (BLM) property, OTI was acquired by an Australian company, Ambre energy, Ltd. Ambre energy’s business plan was to utilize OTI’s patented process to liquefy coal into crude oil, and Oil Tech investors realized 100% return on their investment.
In 2011, the CTI team saw the effects of more restrictive environmental laws in the coal industry—for both coal mines and coal-fired plants. They realized the technology they had patented with OTI could be altered to prevent patent infringement against the OTI technology, and in creating new patents the CTI team could greatly improve the efficiency and process of the OTI technology through alterations, enhancements, and new technology -- applied now to coal. This new process could remove the toxins from the coal in the form of crude oil, leaving a char still suitable for burning in coal-fired plants; and all preformed with little toxic emissions entering the atmosphere.
CoalTech, Inc. was formed as a Utah corporation and the management team invested significant funds and countless hours in to re-designing the coal processing system (retort), resulting in a proprietary system for which a patent was applied, paid for and subsequently issued by and to Lloyd Swain. Lloyd Swain has assigned the patent to the Company pursuant to an assignment and Promissory Note secured by the patent. Additional patent amendments are being prepared for filing. The team funded a six-foot retort unit to obtain the various materials and liquids to be compared with the company’s original goals of clean burning char with all toxins exiting the process in the form of refinery-ready liquid crude oil.
Both products of oil and clean char were sent to Wyoming Analytical Laboratories in Cheyenne, Wyoming, where all tests were conducted. As anticipated, the vast majority of toxic hydro-carbons previously found in the coal escaped first in vapor form and then were condensed into liquid oil. The tests confirmed a total of 2.85 barrels of crude oil extracted from one short-ton of coal. The clean char, now one third the weight of the original raw coal tonnage, was found to still burn at 75% BTU value of the raw coal.
After years of time and management’s personal investment, CTI’s hypothesis—that coal could be cleaned and used in coal-fired plants in an environmentally friendly manner—was not just verified, but revealed the incredible revenue potential for crude oil production. Finding this clean-coal solution was the goal—but the volume of crude oil produced was an even more-impressive discovery. Lloyd Swain quickly pursued, financed, and received a patent on the newer, more advanced technology.
CTI is partnering with a small coal-fired power plant in Utah to construct and operate a medium-sized commercial retort unit at the power plant facility. This small commercial retort will provide additional time for heating the coal, extract additional toxic vapors, and produce clean char emitting near zero toxins into the atmosphere. Following these runs and subsequent testing, the company will be ready to embark on a full-scale production campaign both at home and abroad.
Test Result Notes
We have tested the technology on a scaled-down version. The independent test was completed by the Wyoming Analytical Laboratories, Inc. The results showed significant reduction in toxins found in coal. The test results are found in the following pages. We will publish our updated test results once we have completed and tested our larger retort unit.
Original scaled-down version test
The original test was completed using the original patented process. With enhancements to the design and technology, CTI will build a larger-scale retort to validate the original test results. CTI fully expects the results to be significantly better.
Tonnage/Mass Reduction
For comparison purposes of our summary numbers and percentages, the removal of moisture and the low volatiles during the char process has decreased the original mass to 1/3 of its original tonnage. For example, 1/3 ton of char is equivalent to 1 ton of the original lignite or Powder River Basin (PRB) coal.
Heating Values Considerations
- Presented in this report are “dry basis” values for heating. While heating values (BTU's) appear to have remained close to original values it is important to remember that for the char, the moisture is already gone, so no energy will be necessary or expended to remove moisture in the power plant.
- There is considerable savings and better quality in the amount of volatiles and environmentally harmful products created from the charring process of coal. This will allow the utilization of world’s lower forms of coal such as lignite to yield a similar BTU content with less volume of harmful chemicals being released into the air.
- Starting from the raw coal extracted from the ground, in consideration of the whole, (one hundred percent), it is understood that once the coal is dried, there is generally one third less volume left in the coal remaining. This, we found, is in particular the case with Texas Lignite coal. Texas Lignite holds more moisture than that of PRB and the Combined Texas Lignite/PRB blend.
- In the Final Report of the char-to-ash (ash is what remains after the char is burned in the coal-fired plant) sequence, the mass remaining is indicative of a 67% decrease in volume on the Texas Lignite, a 63% decrease in volume on the PRB, and a 62% decrease in volume on the Composite Blend, respectively. We were able to estimate the volume and makeup of the gas stream that would be coming through the flue gas of each chemical and materials as a result of the char-to-ash process. Keep in mind that we are unable to equate actual real-time power-plant conditions as we are unaware of the percent of oxygen utilized in the combustion process, the amount of time the coal is processed, under what pressure or temperatures, etc.
Considerations for Mercury
In many cases, as in the case with Mercury, there are only trace amounts left in the char. Mercury is a very volatile element. After the drying process, there is one third less Mercury present. After the charring process, there is approximately 50 percent less volume; showing a total Mercury reduction of approximately 85 percent overall.
Considerations for Sulfur
Coal contains three classes of Sulfur. These are Pyretic, Sulfate, and Organic. Pyretic and Organic Sulfur are the most volatile of the three. Sulfate is a dormant form of sulfur and is not found to be particularly harmful to the environment. During combustion, Organic Sulfur and Pyretic Sulfur are oxidized to form Sulfur dioxide (S02), and with the right combustion conditions, some small amount of sulfur trioxide (S03) can be formed. The sulfate forms usually represent a small percentage of the total Sulfur in coal and have little to do with the combustion or contributions to SOX emissions. Under the laboratory test conditions, the sulfates seem to have increased at levels higher than the mass loss levels observed.
Combustion conditions often change the more volatile types of sulfur discussed; pyretic and organic. The amount emitted of SOx is complicated due to combustion conditions differing from plant to plant. Our tests show in the case of the lignite and PRB coal that the Pyretic Sulfur values showed significant loss while sulfate and organic species increased. It appears some Pyretic Sulfur was converted to Sulfate. The organic species appear to have been mostly retained during the mass reduction by charring.
It has been determined that a slower heating process tends to bind the Sulfur and turn higher percentages into Sulfate, a better form of Sulfur. It is also possible to add Calcium to the process. Calcium will bind the Sulfur and keep much of it from forming into SOx.
During the charring process, it was found that some of the more volatile forms of Sulfur were still residing long enough in the gas streams to recombine with elements such as calcium to form stable Sulfates.
Considerations for Nitrogen
Overall Nitrogen, as in the case of overall Sulfur, without the presence of Oxygen decreasing during the charring process by virtue, again of the decreased volume remaining to yield the similar BTU.
NOx formation from the combustion process comes from two mechanisms: Thermal NOx is primarily a function of the 3 T's (Time Temp and Turbulence).
Chemically bound nitrogen is oxidized in the combustion process. Here the Temperature is also a factor. This is also known as fuel NOx. Argon was utilized in the lab as a secondary chemical process when charring the coal. There seemed to be no significant changes in the process of Nitrogen production. However, after the charring process the remaining oxygen is minimal and has been reduced considerably, reducing the total NOx potential.
Again, however, the charring process has reduced the volume by an additional one-third, yielding approximately the same BTU, so ultimately showing a decrease in harmful materials in the air as the result.
Consideration for Carbon
Carbon combustion, thus the creation of Carbon Dioxide (C02) from coal processing is blamed for much of the greenhouse gasses the environmental groups are concerned about at present time. There is a considerable decrease of the overall Carbon and Oxygen during the charring process as a result of decreased volume. However, when the char is again combusted at the plant it becomes an issue related to particular plant efficiencies and their particular plant processes to determine Carbon Dioxide Percentages.
Carbon Dioxide is important in the energy transfer. Without it we do not have the equivalent BTU necessary to create the energy. Again, when discussing the C02 potential, the oxygen has been reduced considerably in the char, but depending on combustion techniques within the plant site this re-oxygenation potential can vary somewhat in various equipment.
Extracts from the Coal During the Process
Lignite coals show primarily single-ring systems largely comprised of 0-functional groups. Many Hydrogen bonds are linked. Many Alkanes and Alkenes also exist here. Approximately 2.5 ml from 5 grams of crude were extracted from the lignite coal. This equates to 2.85 barrels of oil per short ton of dried product extracted. An average sized power plant uses 7,500 tons of coal each day. This results in CTI’s ability to produce 21,375 barrels of crude oil to sell, per day.
This analysis has confirmed that burning straight Texas Lignite Char versus burning Raw Dried Composite is an overall reduction of 9% Volatile, 5% Fixed Carbon, 9% Carbon, 11% Hydrogen, 15% Nitrogen, 11% Oxygen, with a 19% increase in overall Sulfur.
Burning Texas Lignite (TL) Char vs. Burning Composite Raw Coal
- Mercury - 85% reduction
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) - 33% reduction
- Sulfur Oxide (SOx) - 31% reduction
- Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) - 67% reduction
- Volatiles - 32% reduction
- Fixed Carbon - 30% reduction
- Carbon - 27% reduction
- Total Sulfur - 19% increase
- Oxygen - 67% reduction
- Hydrogen - 35% reduction
Source: GreatPoint Energy
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
