Below is an article where the tiny Gulf country Qatar is going 2nd on building a plant to turn natural gas into a liquid fuel...Jet A kerosene with zero sulfur content. This goes by the initals GTL, standing for gas to liquids. Malaysia was 1st.

It is sad to say that Penn State U Engineering here in the USA has been trying for over ten years to get the US Military to build similar plants to make both Jet A and Ultra-Low-Sulfur-Diesel (ULSD) from either natural gas...or gas made from coal.

So far these efforts have been in vain.

The governor of Montana has also been lobbying hard to get this done, where he wants the synthetic diesel to be made from Montana mined coal...this would create a lot of high paying mining and industrial jobs in Montana.

Making a liquid fuel from natural gas is nothing new in the USA.
Until recently a liquid chemical called by its initials MTBE was made from natural gas and added to gasoline to both raise its octane and make it burn cleaner...but it was banned in the USA over the past 2 years because it was leaking from underground tanks and getting into groundwater, particularly in California. When MTBE was banned, the USA had to start importing more foreign crude oil to make up for the 5 to 10% of gasoline that MTBE was filling in for.
==========
Qatar Leads New Research into Cleaner Jet Fuel http://www.imaginova.com/contactus/feedback.php?r=ck]Chris Kjelgaard[/URL]
Senior Editor
Aviation.comFri Nov 16, 9:45 AM ET [/align] Qatar Leads New Research into Cleaner Jet Fuel
Chris Kjelgaard
Senior Editor
Aviation.com Four Qatar-based organizations are partnering with Airbus, Rolls-Royce and Shell International Petroleum to research the potential benefits of using synthetic, cleanerjet fuel in commercial aircraft engines. At this week's Dubai Airshow, Qatar Airways, Qatar Petroleum, Qatar Fuel Company and the Qatar Science and Technology Park signed an agreement with the three companies to study the feasibility of powering jetliners with gas-to-liquid (GTL) synthetic jet fuels created by converting natural gas to kerosene. No equipment modification needed According to the partners, the properties of GTL kerosene are largely similar to those of conventional jet fuel, making it a "drop in" replacement for oil-derived kerosene in aero engines and airports without requiring any modifications to equipment. Combustion of GTL kerosene in jet engines creates less particulate emissions than does petroleum-derived kerosene, they added. Initially, the research project won't run jet engines purely on synthetic fuel - it will be mixed with regular jet fuel, probably in equal proportion, the partners said. The research will focus on evaluating potential improvements in local air quality, fuel economy and reductions in carbon dioxide and other emissions. Other studies will evaluate the operational benefits for airlines of using GTL kerosene, such as enhanced payload-range performance, reduced fuel burn and increased engine durability. Mick Forey and Sjoerd Post, respectively Rolls-Royce's senior vice president - airlines and a vice president of Shell, explained to media at the Dubai Airshow that GTL kerosene burns more cleanly and possess higher energy density than oil-derived kerosene, allowing aircraft to burn less fuel to fly the same distance. Much cleaner air expected round airports Forey and Post also explained that GTL kerosene produces no nitrate or sulfur emissions so,although using GTL kerosene in commercial jetliner engines won't reduce CO2 emissions enormously, it should provide large-scale improvements in air quality at and around airports. Qatar Airways' aim, revealed publicly by CEO Akbar Al-Baker earlier this year in New York on the occasion of his airline introducing service to the U.S., and reiterated at the Dubai Airshow, is to become the first airline to perform a flight fueled solely by GTL kerosene. Its aim is consistent with the development of the Pearl GTL project at Ras Laffan Industrial City in Qatar, intended to make Qatar "the GTL capital of the world," according to the partners. The conversion of natural gas to kerosene is performed using a variation of the Fischer-Tropsch catalyzed chemical process originally developed by Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Germany in the 1920s. Research into "drop in" GTL kerosene confirms to the framework set out by the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI), an international consortium including Airbus, Rolls-Royce and Shell among its members. CAAFI is coordinating the development and commercialization of "drop in" alternative fuels that can directly supplement or replace petroleum-derived jet fuels. Timetable for synthetic fuel development Under the FAA's oversight, CAAFI's Certification and Qualification Panel has outlined a roadmap for alternative-fuels airworthiness approvals, including synthetic fuels derived using the Fischer-Tropsch process. The roadmap supports the approval of a 50-50 semi-synthetic blend of Jet A/A1 kerosene and synthetic fuel by late 2008. It also supports development of a 100-percent synthetic fuel specification by the end of the decade, in time for the Pearl GTL plant coming online. [/align][/align]

 

This isn't as new as the article would have you belive. The US Air Focre has been testing this new synthetic fuel for about a year now. They have already certified B-52s to use 100% synthetic fuel. It reduced particulates in the exhaust by 30 to 60%. They are in the process of certifing all USAF jet aircraft to use it.
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123066920
The cool thing is it can be made from coal as well--something the US has lots of. Qatar has massive natural gas reserves so that is what they will use to make it.

 

I have been reading about the Airforce tests.

Another reason to do this is that the tests show that our military jet engines would have slightly higher thrust and also go slightly longer on a set of turbine blades before replacement.

It is not out of line to say this could save pilot lives.

A military jet using GTL synthetic jet A might be able to avoid a missile with the slight performance boost,
or a jet engine might not fail causing a bail-out which also means the loss of a super-expensive F22 fighter for example.

My grandfather, father and I have been studying synthetic liquid fuels (especially from coal & natural gas) in a long line starting back in the 1930s.

My younger brother is a Penn St engineer who actually knows a few of the guys doing their syn fuel stuff. He and his Penn St wife are generally good company...except when Penn St football with legendary JoePat plays the hapless Duke U football team....or when discussing how good Penn St ice cream is, or how the best weathermen on TV are always Penn St grads.

 

MTBE was replaced with ehtanol, not more crude. That is why corn prices are so high right now.

 

There is currently a lobby in right now.. many of you may or may not know but we are currently deactivating 50 of our ICBM's up here in the rocket ranch. For those of you who know what I am talking about the 564th, or odd squad, is going away. Back to my point, the congress is somehow with some kind of rider bill holding ten of those sites. We are not allowed, currently, to deactivate the last ten of those fifty unitl the Air Force completes a study regarding either puting a flying mission back at Malmstrom AFB or putting a coal to liquid fuels plant here. The state Sentors and Governor here are all tore up about this stuff. Northcentral Montana depends on the AFB for alot of its economy and wants to make certain its here for a very long time.

 

MTBE was replaced with ethanol
but if you have been following the debate about ethanol
it takes as much diesel fuel in the tractors & combines on farms
& 18 wheel trucks hauling corn first, and ethanol gallons second,
and natural gas at the distilleries
to make a gallon of ethanol
that there is almost..maybe no....gain in fuel or energy independence for the USA.

Whether ethanol is good or bad
depends entirely on how you treat the 'leftovers' at the distillery vats
which is a gooey mass called 'distiller's grain'
that is fed to cattle.

What is undeniable
is that ex-Senator Bob Dole
and present Senator Chuck Grassley
got a 51 cent per gallon tax credit for ethanol MADE ONLY FROM CORN
and this has been a great boon to the corn farmer
and now very expensive for the US citizen
buying food at the grocery store.

 

The key for most of this is for us to gain our energy independence. Unfortunately in the short term that's going to mean more drilling in places that the envorinmentalists don't want us to. There is no viable fuel alternative currently available, or at least none that we're going to see mass produced any time soon.

The hype and fear generated over this whole global warming thing is impeding a lot of things as well. I don't know if global warming isa real threat or not. We've got scientists on one side clanging the doom and gloom bell and just as many saying it's a natural cycle of the earth's weather. Both sides have supporting evidence, but unless you're a scientist yourself, good luck deciphering what it all means.

Either way, we are going to continue relying on pertroleum for quite a while until some alternative is developed and produced on a large scale (be it synthetic fuels or other means such as electric or fuel cells, etc). The token efforts of the big auto makers with their little gas/electrics aren't going to cut it. What I find interesting is that these little cars are quoting 40 MPG or in that range, yet back in the early 90's Honda sold a special edition of the Civic (with no electric motors, or the like) that was rated at 55 MPG. Apparently the technology is available to get high milage from purely gasoline power, but where is it? The answer is simply the desire for more profit.

 

Back in the early 80's my friend's mom had a Chevy Sprint Turbo (made by Suzuki)that went like a bat out of hell but would get56-58 MPG on paper every time with 4 people. We would borrow it and leave her my '70 VW Bug because we could run around all weekend onabout $3.00. I think it only held like 8 gallons of gas. Drivingthat car was like driving a fastgo-kart. I heard later that the 3 cylinderengine in those things was originally for a crotch rocket, but vibrated too much so Suzuki found a market for them with GM.

 

The technology exists, big oil likes their big bottom line though. We are at their mercy

 

in the WW2 war germany maded most of their fuel from coal...