青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量 (zz) (转载) - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>ChemEng - 化学工程

青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量 (zz) (转载)

青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量 (zz) (转载)# ChemEng - 化学工程

O*n2009-09-25 07:09

1 楼

鉴于最近老邢系统抽风频繁，特此重申一下关于掉线等原因导致比赛中断的规则，请选
手们和裁判仔细阅读。
1.比赛过程中如遇到选手断线情况，由裁判提醒其他参赛选手酌情等待，如等到15秒以
后再出牌。
2.比赛过程中如遇到一名选手如果碰到天灾（停电，彻底断线或被系统无故踢出等）导
致比赛中断，裁判应与双方协商复盘到断线前状态继续比赛或者择日复盘。如果有一方
坚决不同意，裁判可以结束当天比赛，组委会根据录像再做最后决定，原则上大体以天
灾方扣级或非天灾方加级为主(如果不够扣），级数视当时具体情况而定（比如天灾方
领先（-3），平局（-2），或者落后(-2)),
组委会拥有最后判罚权，保留判天灾方弃权的权力。
3.比赛过程中由于系统原因导致多人(>=2)掉线，比赛中断或无法进行的情况，由裁判
记录下当时盘数和比分，择日复盘。

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

2 楼

【以下文字转载自 ChinaNews 讨论区】
发信人: Physmolecule (斐丝~), 信区: ChinaNews
标题: 青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量 (zz)
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Sep 25 15:05:53 2009, 美东)
发信人: Physmolecule (斐丝~), 信区: Military
标题: 青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量 (zz)
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Sep 25 15:05:42 2009, 美东)
青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量
中广网北京9月25日消息中国国土资源部总工程师张洪涛先生25日在北京介绍，中国地
质部门在青藏高原发现了一种名为可燃冰(又称天然气水合物)的环保新能源，预计十年
左右能投入使用。
在当天的新闻发布会上，张洪涛说，这是中国首次在陆域上发现可燃冰，使中国成为加
拿大、美国之后，在陆域上通过国家计划钻探发现可燃冰的第三个国家。
他介绍，初略的估算，远景资源量至少有350亿吨油当量。
可燃冰是水和天然气在高压、低温条件下混合

s*y2009-09-25 07:09

3 楼

裁判断了咋办？

x*h2009-09-25 07:09

4 楼

350 亿吨油是什么概念？

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

: 【以下文字转载自 ChinaNews 讨论区】
: 发信人: Physmolecule (斐丝~), 信区: ChinaNews
: 标题: 青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量 (zz)
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Sep 25 15:05:53 2009, 美东)
: 发信人: Physmolecule (斐丝~), 信区: Military
: 标题: 青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量 (zz)
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Sep 25 15:05:42 2009, 美东)
: 青藏高原发现新能源可燃冰至少350亿吨油当量
: 中广网北京9月25日消息中国国土资源部总工程师张洪涛先生25日在北京介绍，中国地
: 质部门在青藏高原发现了一种名为可燃冰(又称天然气水合物)的环保新能源，预计十年

f*y2009-09-25 07:09

5 楼

复盘到断线前状态继续比赛
择日复盘
“复盘”是指大家2:2开始，人为的打到短线时的比分后再开始比赛吗？

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

6 楼

中国2008年消耗原油 3.7亿吨。
不知道可低成本开采储量有多大。

【在 x****h 的大作中提到】

: 350 亿吨油是什么概念？

O*n2009-09-25 07:09

7 楼

对

【在 f*********y 的大作中提到】

: 复盘到断线前状态继续比赛
: 择日复盘
: “复盘”是指大家2:2开始，人为的打到短线时的比分后再开始比赛吗？

t*n2009-09-25 07:09

8 楼

不太懂，燃烧不产CO2?
天然气不算新能源吧

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

9 楼

产生CO2。
但是天然气是单位能量生成CO2最少的化石燃料。
可燃冰跟天然气属同一类，但也可算是一种“新形式”的能源资源。

【在 t******n 的大作中提到】

: 不太懂，燃烧不产CO2?
: 天然气不算新能源吧

S*n2009-09-25 07:09

10 楼

可燃冰算新能源（new energy），也算替代性能源（alternative energy），但是不算
可持续能源（renewable energy）
我觉得这个不难理解吧。。。

【在 t******n 的大作中提到】

: 不太懂，燃烧不产CO2?
: 天然气不算新能源吧

t*n2009-09-25 07:09

11 楼

替代周期比石油短？

【在 S*****n 的大作中提到】

: 可燃冰算新能源（new energy），也算替代性能源（alternative energy），但是不算
: 可持续能源（renewable energy）
: 我觉得这个不难理解吧。。。

l*w2009-09-25 07:09

12 楼

可燃冰算新能源？
它也是Hydrocarbon啊。

【在 S*****n 的大作中提到】

: 可燃冰算新能源（new energy），也算替代性能源（alternative energy），但是不算
: 可持续能源（renewable energy）
: 我觉得这个不难理解吧。。。

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

13 楼

虽然它是hydrocarbon，但它不是conventional oil/gas,而且开采技术还远没有商业化，
所以算在新能源里面。

【在 l*w 的大作中提到】

: 可燃冰算新能源？
: 它也是Hydrocarbon啊。

y*a2009-09-25 07:09

14 楼

Gas hydrate is unconvetional. I am not optimistic about its future before $
200-$300/bbl oil. Before gas hydrate could be used as an engergy source,
heavy oil/tar sand, shale gas etc would provide energy security for an
extended time. It has a great potential largely because of its tramandous
amount and large extend (e.g., ocean seafloor, permeafrost area/alaska or
siberia etc.) but with an imaginary recovery factor we think we could
achieve, e.g., 1%. However, the lack of natural fracture

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

: 虽然它是hydrocarbon，但它不是conventional oil/gas,而且开采技术还远没有商业化，
: 所以算在新能源里面。

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

15 楼

many research works have been done and many are doing on gas hydrate production.
So are detection and field exploration.

【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】

: Gas hydrate is unconvetional. I am not optimistic about its future before $
: 200-$300/bbl oil. Before gas hydrate could be used as an engergy source,
: heavy oil/tar sand, shale gas etc would provide energy security for an
: extended time. It has a great potential largely because of its tramandous
: amount and large extend (e.g., ocean seafloor, permeafrost area/alaska or
: siberia etc.) but with an imaginary recovery factor we think we could
: achieve, e.g., 1%. However, the lack of natural fracture

y*a2009-09-25 07:09

16 楼

I agree that many research works have been done on hydrate. It makes more
sense of offshore production than onshore permafrost production. There are
several reasons:
(1) Hydrate, when appeared in formation, often behaves like a glue to
underground rock. How the removal of these hydrate would jeopardy the
rigidity of the rock?
(2) Hydrate is a solid but not a fluid. Combining reason (1), it would be
very possible that the formation will crash when hydrate is depleted.
(3) Well control. Hydr

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

: many research works have been done and many are doing on gas hydrate production.
: So are detection and field exploration.

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

17 楼

Your comments are very good. These are actual challenges.
However, since new techniques are developing, some of the challenges may be
overcome in the future. Some offshore demonstration is under plan.
One comment for your point 3, well control. The depletion of gas hydrate is not
a self-excited process like the chain reaction, because decomposition of gas hydrate is an endothermic reaction, the temperature and pressure will decrease if
no heat is input continuously.
Your comments on sediment sta

【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】

: I agree that many research works have been done on hydrate. It makes more
: sense of offshore production than onshore permafrost production. There are
: several reasons:
: (1) Hydrate, when appeared in formation, often behaves like a glue to
: underground rock. How the removal of these hydrate would jeopardy the
: rigidity of the rock?
: (2) Hydrate is a solid but not a fluid. Combining reason (1), it would be
: very possible that the formation will crash when hydrate is depleted.
: (3) Well control. Hydr

y*a2009-09-25 07:09

18 楼

Thank you for your comments. "Offshore demonstration is under plan" implies
that offshore hydrate production might be easier than onshore ones. 青藏高
原 is definitely onshore.
You are right on the endothermic process. However, in offshore production (
collapse hazard is small compared with onshore activity), when hydrate is
moving upwards, the temperature is higher and pressure is lower in the
tubing (think about water temperature and pressure gradient). The well control concern arose most like

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

: Your comments are very good. These are actual challenges.
: However, since new techniques are developing, some of the challenges may be
: overcome in the future. Some offshore demonstration is under plan.
: One comment for your point 3, well control. The depletion of gas hydrate is not
: a self-excited process like the chain reaction, because decomposition of gas hydrate is an endothermic reaction, the temperature and pressure will decrease if
: no heat is input continuously.
: Your comments on sediment sta

y*a2009-09-25 07:09

19 楼

You are definitely right here that 天然气是单位能量生成CO2最少的化石燃料 (almost half of that of coal). I forget the exact number, but if coal is 1 CO2 unit/heat unit, petroleum is like 0.8 unit, methane is like 0.5 unit. However, this number is also very misleading showing that oil is much dirtier than methane.
You should also considering the other things, for example transportation energy cost, for a full picture. Even though methane itself is clean, it requires lots of energy to trasport natural gas to it

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

: 产生CO2。
: 但是天然气是单位能量生成CO2最少的化石燃料。
: 可燃冰跟天然气属同一类，但也可算是一种“新形式”的能源资源。

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

20 楼

The CO2 emission/ unit energy produced, is an important value because it will be highly recommended or even required to capture and sequest CO2 in near future. Of course CH4 is much better than coal, or even oil, in this perspective.
You mentioned after transportation, the energy efficiency of coal:oil:gas =
1.2:0.9:0.8. Do you have any reference? I'm quite interested with this estimation. Even this ratio is correct, 0.9:0.8 is very close to 1. Besides, we have known that in fossil fuel consum

【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】

: You are definitely right here that 天然气是单位能量生成CO2最少的化石燃料 (almost half of that of coal). I forget the exact number, but if coal is 1 CO2 unit/heat unit, petroleum is like 0.8 unit, methane is like 0.5 unit. However, this number is also very misleading showing that oil is much dirtier than methane.
: You should also considering the other things, for example transportation energy cost, for a full picture. Even though methane itself is clean, it requires lots of energy to trasport natural gas to it

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

21 楼

Things may not be that horrible as you think. Technologies are devoloping very ffast.
Research and progress on hydrate production are on-going rapidly. You may better
update your estimation in near future.
It's hard to predict future technology development. I remember one saying: if some scientist says "something is possible in next 50 years", he may be correct; if someone says "something is impossible in next 50 years", he is possibly wrong. 20 years ago, a super computer requires a large room

【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】

: Thank you for your comments. "Offshore demonstration is under plan" implies
: that offshore hydrate production might be easier than onshore ones. 青藏高
: 原 is definitely onshore.
: You are right on the endothermic process. However, in offshore production (
: collapse hazard is small compared with onshore activity), when hydrate is
: moving upwards, the temperature is higher and pressure is lower in the
: tubing (think about water temperature and pressure gradient). The well control concern arose most like

y*a2009-09-25 07:09

22 楼

Very nice comments and insightful analysis. In terms of fossil fuel (coal,
oil and gas), I should say that gas has the brightest near-term future (in 0
-50 years, including NG, LNG, LPG) while coal has the least. According to
[email protected], in the next decades, NG will erode market share of coal while oil
remains largely stable (unless transportation industry takes a major reform)
. This is aligned with your observation and prediction.
Oil is for sure dirtier than gas. But in terms of CO2, oil is

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

:
: Things may not be that horrible as you think. Technologies are devoloping very ffast.
: Research and progress on hydrate production are on-going rapidly. You may better
: update your estimation in near future.
: It's hard to predict future technology development. I remember one saying: if some scientist says "something is possible in next 50 years", he may be correct; if someone says "something is impossible in next 50 years", he is possibly wrong. 20 years ago, a super computer requires a large room

y*a2009-09-25 07:09

23 楼

Quoting:
It's hard to predict future technology development. I remember one saying:
if some scientist says "something is possible in next 50 years", he may be
correct; if someone says "something is impossible in next 50 years", he is
possibly wrong. 20 years ago, a super computer requires a large room, but
nowadays, a laptop will beat a super computer at that time. 20 years ago,
whole genome sequencing seems impossible, now, a few days are enough.
I agree your first sentence but disagree with th

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

24 楼

Thanks a lot for your argument with abundant analysis.
On the one hand, I agree with you that there are many challanges, and many alternative options comparing with hydrate. So it's possible that in near future, say, 10-20 years, hydrate gas production may be not a cost-effective candidate.
However, on the other hand, I disagree with your conclusion that hydrate production is a fun. Firstly, you argued with the limited budget from government on fossil fuel. It looks plausible, but, the energy in

【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】

: Quoting:
: It's hard to predict future technology development. I remember one saying:
: if some scientist says "something is possible in next 50 years", he may be
: correct; if someone says "something is impossible in next 50 years", he is
: possibly wrong. 20 years ago, a super computer requires a large room, but
: nowadays, a laptop will beat a super computer at that time. 20 years ago,
: whole genome sequencing seems impossible, now, a few days are enough.
: I agree your first sentence but disagree with th

k*i2009-09-25 07:09

25 楼

My opinion:
In one word,
(1) in near future, hydrate gas production is not an option, it's still under research;
(2) in the long term future, at current stage, no one can tell whether hydrate gas production is a good candidate comparing with other gas resources; but research has shown the possiblity of production. Therefore, I believe it's hasty to say hydrate gas production is fun.
So we agree with each other in much of the discussion; just hold different points of view on the long term future

【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】

: Very nice comments and insightful analysis. In terms of fossil fuel (coal,
: oil and gas), I should say that gas has the brightest near-term future (in 0
: -50 years, including NG, LNG, LPG) while coal has the least. According to
: [email protected], in the next decades, NG will erode market share of coal while oil
: remains largely stable (unless transportation industry takes a major reform)
: . This is aligned with your observation and prediction.
: Oil is for sure dirtier than gas. But in terms of CO2, oil is

y*a2009-09-25 07:09

26 楼

First of all, thank you for your wonderful and excellent comments. You
definitely have more exposure than myself in terms of gas hydrate as in your
advisor's lab. The energy industry is determined just minorly by
technology, but most likely by geographical and geopolitical constraints.
Business is business. Oil companies would not hurry in a massive manner (
they are still willing to provide some funding) before the future is clearer
. For example, Exxon has investigated large amount of mon

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

: My opinion:
: In one word,
: (1) in near future, hydrate gas production is not an option, it's still under research;
: (2) in the long term future, at current stage, no one can tell whether hydrate gas production is a good candidate comparing with other gas resources; but research has shown the possiblity of production. Therefore, I believe it's hasty to say hydrate gas production is fun.
: So we agree with each other in much of the discussion; just hold different points of view on the long term future

y*g2009-09-25 07:09

27 楼

我们实验室就是做gas hydrate的。做CO2 CCS. 感觉也没啥前途。

A*T2009-09-25 07:09

28 楼

为啥不做methane hydrate？

我们实验室就是做gas hydrate的。做CO2 CCS. 感觉也没啥前途。

【在 y***g 的大作中提到】

: 我们实验室就是做gas hydrate的。做CO2 CCS. 感觉也没啥前途。

y*g2009-09-25 07:09

29 楼

现在不是CO2 CCS热门嘛。老板整了几个项目。纯粹写文章是灌水。

T*l2009-09-25 07:09

30 楼

美国早就开始搞这个了，原来我们组为此还到过南极去采过样，后来据说有一些地质
力学上的原因，一直不敢贸然行动。

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】

T*g2009-09-25 07:09

31 楼

Wow. Lots of cool stuff to read through here with a great interest oo my
own. I was just curious what the research community say today about the
potential climate (ocean currents) alterations the depletion of the seabed
gas hydrate might do.
Comments? It seemed to me the theory that gas hyrate deposits might act
like refrig sources that drive a gigantic global AC sysstem for the earth
had some merits...

under research;
hydrate gas production is a good candidate comparing with other gas
resources; but research has shown the possiblity of production. Therefore, I
believe it's hasty to say hydrate gas production is fun.
points of view on the long term future of gas hydrate.
great.

【在 k***i 的大作中提到】