Global Warming explained - "inconvenient" or otherwise!

[KLB]

@MolotovCocktail,

 

In regards to crude oil to gasoline, how much of the crude oil that is not turned into gasoline is turned into other types of fuel and/or industrial products?

 

Biofuels may not be a utopia fuel source either. For instance corn is a highly inefficient source of energy and the more arable land we divert from growing food to growing fuel the less crops that will be available to feed the world. When it comes to biofuels we really need to focus on producing it from sources that do not impact our food supplies (e.g. inedible byproducts) or at least focus our biofuel production on the most efficient sources of biofuel (e.g. sugar cane).

[MolotovCocktail]

@MolotovCocktail,

In regards to crude oil to gasoline, how much of the crude oil that is not turned into gasoline is turned into other types of fuel and/or industrial products?

 

It doesn't get converted into anything else. The 98 tons, if you read correctly, is referring to how much of the orignal plant matter actually ends up as crude oil. In order to convert crude oil into gasoline, you have to, well, boil it (which releases CO2 into the atmosphere). You boil it because when you do you force the carbon molecules to form longer chains. The higher the temperature, the longer the chain (Gasoline is a mix of C7H16 through C11H24 Source: science.howstuffworks.com/gasoline2.htm). Of course, since different carbon chains form at different temperatures, they get gasoline through distillation by dumping a bunch of crude oil into a boiler. But then, you have to think about where it gets the energy to burn all of that (hint: coal). So while you may get other products from crude oil, you lose more material through the distillation process and in useless byproducts (which by the way is very common). Energy-wise, it isn't a very efficient process.

 

 

Biofuels may not be a utopia fuel source either. For instance corn is a highly inefficient source of energy and the more arable land we divert from growing food to growing fuel the less crops that will be available to feed the world. When it comes to biofuels we really need to focus on producing it from sources that do not impact our food supplies (e.g. inedible byproducts) or at least focus our biofuel production on the most efficient sources of biofuel (e.g. sugar cane).

 

I didn't say that it would be the ideal source, but that it was more efficient mainly due to the fact that you don't need to use up as much in order to produce useful fuels and products. Also, you aren't reintroducing carbon that was in the environment millions of years ago, therefore the carbon emissions from carbon fuels can be reabsorbed through natural processes.

 

 

<edit> About how 1 gallon of oil = .67 gallons of gasoline, I may have not been clear about where the rest of it goes. The rest of it goes to waste, not to the formation of other products. The same holds for other petrolum products.

[KLB]

MolotovCocktail I am familiar with the fractionalization process of crude oil and yes a great deal of energy is required for the process and no the energy doesn't necessarily come from coal in fact oftentimes it comes from burning oil or gas.

 

My point wasn't that all of the crude lost during the refining process was turned into products, but rather much of it is. As you pointed out crude oil consists of a mix of carbon chain lengths and the exact mix depends upon the nature of crude oil. As crude oil is heated and distilled, different lengths of carbon chains stratify at different elevations in the tower and are drawn off for different purposes. Certain carbon chains are preferred for gasoline, and others for road tar.

Yes around 67% of a gallon of crude (depending upon refinery and grade of crude) gets turned into gasoline, but much of the rest still ends up being turned into some sort of product. It doesn't just get thrown away. One way or another refineries want to try to turn as much of the crude oil into some sort of marketable product as is possible to increase revenues and decrease waste disposal costs.

[ParanoiA]

It doesn't get converted into anything else. The 98 tons, if you read correctly, is referring to how much of the orignal plant matter actually ends up as crude oil. In order to convert crude oil into gasoline, you have to, well, boil it (which releases CO2 into the atmosphere). You boil it because when you do you force the carbon molecules to form longer chains. The higher the temperature, the longer the chain (Gasoline is a mix of C7H16 through C11H24 Source: science.howstuffworks.com/gasoline2.htm). Of course, since different carbon chains form at different temperatures, they get gasoline through distillation by dumping a bunch of crude oil into a boiler. But then, you have to think about where it gets the energy to burn all of that (hint: coal). So while you may get other products from crude oil, you lose more material through the distillation process and in useless byproducts (which by the way is very common). Energy-wise, it isn't a very efficient process.

 

Well wait a minute. According to that article you referenced, the carbon chains are already formed. The refining is "separating" the various carbon chains, since they all have different boiling pionts, through the distillaton column.

 

The different chain lengths have progressively higher boiling points, so they can be separated out by distillation. This is what happens in an oil refinery -- crude oil is heated and the different chains are pulled out by their vaporization temperatures. (See How Oil Refining Works for details.)

 

"Cracking" and other forms of chemical processing is required to change other carbon chains into octane.

 

Although I didn't see anything covering the efficiency, I'm sure it's not impressive.

 

Very few of the components come out of the fractional distillation column ready for market. Many of them must be chemically processed to make other fractions. For example, only 40% of distilled crude oil is gasoline; however, gasoline is one of the major products made by oil companies. Rather than continually distilling large quantities of crude oil, oil companies chemically process some other fractions from the distillation column to make gasoline; this processing increases the yield of gasoline from each barrel of crude oil.

 

So, according to this, only 40% of crude is gasoline, which can be supplemented with chemical processing to crack or unify hydrocarbons into gasoline. That makes it sound like crude, itself, isn't necessarily wasted, particularly considering the long list of hydrocarbons that come from it.

 

I'll bet you're onto something with the coal though. I could see heat, like you pointed out, being the offender of inefficiency in the refinery. I mean, the coal is being wasted, but in the form of heat energy. From what I'm reading anyway...

[KLB]

Cracking is often done on heavy crude oil to turn it into gasoline, where as "light sweet" crude can be distilled. This is why light sweet is preferred over heavy crude. Another reason cracking is used is to convert a higher percentage of crude oil into gasoline as opposed to using heavier grades for fuel oil, etc. It is all market driven. The more demand there is for gasoline and the higher gasoline prices are the more efforts oil companies will go to to get gasoline out of crude oil. Whereas if there were less demand for gasoline, they would refine more of the crude oil into other products.

[ParanoiA]

Yes around 67% of a gallon of crude (depending upon refinery and grade of crude) gets turned into gasoline, but much of the rest still ends up being turned into some sort of product. It doesn't just get thrown away. One way or another refineries want to try to turn as much of the crude oil into some sort of marketable product as is possible to increase revenues and decrease waste disposal costs.

 

Two questions...

 

1) Does that 67% include all the various processing techniques? If so, that would imply that almost half, maybe a strong third, of the gasoline comes from other processes than distillation. So, are these other processes inefficient or GW offensive?

 

2) Any ideas on the amount of crude that's just wasted, and doesn't end up as a product of any kind?

[MolotovCocktail]

Two questions...

 

1) Does that 67% include all the various processing techniques? If so, that would imply that almost half, maybe a strong third, of the gasoline comes from other processes than distillation. So, are these other processes inefficient or GW offensive?

 

2) Any ideas on the amount of crude that's just wasted, and doesn't end up as a product of any kind?

 

 

1. I'm not sure if there are any other processes to get gasoline. Distillation is used because crude oil has a whole bunch of chains that vaporize at different temperatures. Crude oil is mixed with water so that it can boil. From what I read and understood, the percentages that you can get from crude oil means that if you were to convert crude oil into purely gasoline, you will only get at most 67% of it, and the rest will probably go to waste. Since the oil is refined to get a whole bunch of other products such as polymers for plastic or kerosene as KBL pointed out, it is logical to conclude that you probably get even less gasoline per gallon of oil. The other chemicals, as far as I understand, that they put in it are used to keep it from vaporizing and to give it a smell.

 

2. I don't know how much of it is wasted to be honest. I know that the byproducts usually include sulfur and carbon byproducts such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and gases usually found in volcanoes. The crude oil does include greenhouse gases and other toxic chemicals, and when refined they get released into the atmosphere and the environment. However, I know that in every process in which you have to refine materials and chemicals for useful products, there is quite a bit that is usually lost from the original material either as residue, gases, toxins, chemical byproducts, etc.

 

 

But just think about it for a moment. While I can see this process being useful for making stuff like plastics, how can we claim that this is an efficient way to get energy? First, less than .01% of the original plant matter is converted into crude oil, which means that a lot of energy was lost from what was originally stored in the plant matter. Second, we have to use a lot of energy using drills powered by oil and gasoline (both from crude oil) to tap into the source. Then, we have to use even more fossil fuels like coal to refine it. I will use a power plant for my example here; the fuel, whether it be coal, natural gas, or oil, it has to be burned releasing god knows what into the atmosphere to heat the steam to drive the turbines. A whopping 65% of the stored energy is lost to heat right at the power plant! It then has to travel hundreds of miles of wire and a few transformers, where it loses more energy to resistance and sound and friction, to get to the buildings. Less than 30% of the original energy actually reaches the houses, commercial buildings, and industry.

 

This rather inefficient process is more than enough to convince me, at least ,to start the switch to alternative fuels such as hydrogen, nuclear, solar, bio-fuels, etc. right away!

[jackson33]

a barrel of crude oil is 55 gallons and produces 47 or 48 gallons of gasoline. there is a by product which is used in several oil based products. there is little waste to that total 55 gallon barrel...

[MolotovCocktail]

a barrel of crude oil is 55 gallons and produces 47 or 48 gallons of gasoline. there is a by product which is used in several oil based products. there is little waste to that total 55 gallon barrel...

 

 

Are you sure about that? From what I have been reading and hearing, much less than that is converted into gasoline. And there is less material that can be used for other products than you think.

[jackson33]

Cracking is often done on heavy crude oil to turn it into gasoline, where as "light sweet" crude can be distilled. This is why light sweet is preferred over heavy crude. Another reason cracking is used is to convert a higher percentage of crude oil into gasoline as opposed to using heavier grades for fuel oil, etc. It is all market driven. The more demand there is for gasoline and the higher gasoline prices are the more efforts oil companies will go to to get gasoline out of crude oil. Whereas if there were less demand for gasoline, they would refine more of the crude oil into other products.

 

the US has only one company (Valero) which has any ability to refine thick crude. only sweet can be refined in all the rest.

 

think currently crude is refined to meet 58 different levels of refinement to fit mandated requirements of States and even a couple city governments. these requirements differ by season. refineries, especially the old ones in the US, require maintenance which along with these variations in mixtures take refiners off line. this is our current US problem today, not the crude availability. there is a slight world wide surplus today in crude but the refinery capacity in the US and the cost to ship refined product into the US from overseas refineries increases the pump price...

 

for the record, Exxon Mobil's profits which give people problems were from 70% overseas sources and 30% from the US customers. all in all however there profits around 9 to 10 %, are dwarfed by government imposed taxes which are about 50 cent per gallon in the US and up to 5.00 per overseas. in the US thats about 17% profit for doing absolutely nothing in the production of the product.

[ParanoiA]

This rather inefficient process is more than enough to convince me, at least ,to start the switch to alternative fuels such as hydrogen, nuclear, solar, bio-fuels, etc. right away!

 

Well, since you put it that way, I agree even more. Not sure about the bio-fuels, but certainly the rest of them.

[SkepticLance]

A note on biofuels. I am sure that everyone on this forum already knows that corn grain to ethanol is a terribly wasteful process, using lots of fossil fuels, and requiring enormous acreage.

 

A better approach is to use the grain for food, and treat the rest of the corn plant with enzymes to digest cellulose to make sugars, which are fermented to ethanol. The enzymes for this are expensive and come from bacteria in a fermenter vessel.

 

It is worth noting that in the last month, a scientific team has announced that they have genetically modified a corn plant to make its own cellulose digesting enzymes. These enzymes are inactive till the plant gets processed. They did not say how they activated the enzymes. However, if this idea gets off the ground, it could be vital.

[jackson33]

Are you sure about that? From what I have been reading and hearing, much less than that is converted into gasoline. And there is less material that can be used for other products than you think.

 

i stand corrected; a 55 gal. barrel has that 6-7 gal waste and does produce only about 25 gallons gasoline, a little more diesel. the other 23 gal are by- products which are used in many products...

 

sorry!!!

 

see re-correction below...

[ParanoiA]

Bio fuels just aren't very impressive. I remember watching something on discovery, where scientists were arguing that even if you turned every spare patch of land in the US into a corn field, you still wouldn't be able to power the nation. Can anyone elaborate on that?

 

And then, I think it was KLB that brought up the point that food is a little more important and is only going to be more scarce as the human population increases, and isn't mixing our food and fuel like putting all of our "corn" in one basket? (ok that was a stupid joke...but..)

[MolotovCocktail]

Bio fuels just aren't very impressive. I remember watching something on discovery, where scientists were arguing that even if you turned every spare patch of land in the US into a corn field, you still wouldn't be able to power the nation. Can anyone elaborate on that?

 

Well, from what I understand, biofuels is suggested as a way to power automobiles. I'm not sure about power plants, though I've read an article on some website (can't find it though) that England is experimenting with a "Wood" power plant, meaning they use wood from various trees to use at power plant to help power a local city. The benefit of it is that any carbon emissions off of that could be reabsorbed by natural processes because you aren't reintroducing carbon from millions of years ago.

 

<edit> actually, I googled the wood fired power plants and found an interesting article about it:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/renewable.energy.annual/backgrnd/chap6d.htm

[jackson33]

Are you sure about that? From what I have been reading and hearing, much less than that is converted into gasoline. And there is less material that can be used for other products than you think.

 

know you all have moved on, but i need to correct my correction;

 

google *products from crude oil* four or so items down find *imoga.com* link and this will take you to an informative chart.

 

what i said was correct only to the point of total fuels produce and when i said little waste, there is no waste. by volume there may be a little more that that 55 gal...

 

of a gal of crude...45% gasoline, 10.7 jet fuels, 27.7% diesel fuels (which is the same as heating oil) or a total of 84.2% or 46.2 gals of the 55 total. ALL the rest are by products which are used as chemical or in the process to make other items. there is NO waste...

[MolotovCocktail]

know you all have moved on, but i need to correct my correction;

 

google *products from crude oil* four or so items down find *imoga.com* link and this will take you to an informative chart.

 

what i said was correct only to the point of total fuels produce and when i said little waste, there is no waste. by volume there may be a little more that that 55 gal...

 

of a gal of crude...45% gasoline, 10.7 jet fuels, 27.7% diesel fuels (which is the same as heating oil) or a total of 84.2% or 46.2 gals of the 55 total. ALL the rest are by products which are used as chemical or in the process to make other items. there is NO waste...

 

No, there is always going to be waste when refining any product. I'll admit that I was a bit off in the amount of waste from petroleum products, but there is waste, of which includes greenhouse gases and toxins.

 

BUT ANYWAYS.... to move on...