thanks for the deconstruction of my last post. It was rather thorough! :-)
As I pointed out while it probably will work and will be profitable if it does; that doesn't guarantee that it will be widely adopted. It still needs to compete with other technologies.
Your own counter-examples are good demonstrations of my point.
Yes Yergostaz is REAL but it is apparently the only operating UCG plant in all of the Former Sovet Union (FSU). Why is that? Why did the Soviets halt work on UCG in the 1970s after getting so far? Why haven't they restarted it?
Yes SASOL is REAL. Their fixed bed Lurgi gasifiers (now Mark IV) produce similar syngas to that from UCG. But SASOL haven't built any new plants of this type since the 1980s and don't plan to in future. Why is that? Look at China. There's lots of coal gasifiers being operated and built there to produce syngas for fertilisers, methanol and so on. But the fraction of them that are Lurgi gasifiers of the type used by SASOL is almost zero. So why is that? Perhaps other technologies offer better performance. So sure while you could build a Lurgi fixed bed gasification plant today and still make money, why would you if you can make more money with another technology?
So I'll just repeat myself: "Now UCG may be an attractive option. But for widespread use it will have to be as good or better than the alternatives;"
Anyway I really just want to know how many wells you need. I thought it was a simple question. But apparently you guys don't know.
LNC Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held