My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11937
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSP11937
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2009 8:52:00 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:17:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8040.200
Description
Section D General Studies-Energy
Date
1/1/1974
Author
Davis-Wood-USGS
Title
Energy-Oil Shale-Geological Survey Circular 703-Water Demands for Expanding Energy Development
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />commercial.scale operations exist in the United States <br />and none of several possible processes has been shown to <br />be competitive with alternate fuels. Among processes <br />under consideration are (be following: Consol, solvent <br />refining, H-Coal, and COED (Hottel and Howard, 1971, <br />p. 161-182). Unit water-consumption estimates range <br />from as little as 0.2 acre-ft (247 m') annually per bpd of <br />synthetic-oil output to as much as 1.3 acre-ft (1,600 m') <br />per year per bpd capacity. The National Petroleum <br />Council (1973) adopted a unit consumptive-use value of <br />0.2 acre-ft (247 m') per year per bpd capacity. Until <br />better data become available, this figure is probably as <br />good an estimate as any other for planning purposes. <br />The 0.2 acre-ft (247 m') per year per bpd capacity <br />translates into 20,000 acre-ft (25 million m3) per year <br />for 100,000 barrels (16,000 m3) per day of oil. <br /> <br />SUMMARY <br /> <br />Consumptive demand for water in various energy <br />processes is summarized in table 3 and figure 4. Here <br />consumption of water is compared on the basis of <br />energy output in millions of Btu. The larger consumptive <br /> <br />uses are associated with large cooling requirements, <br />particularly in thennal-electric power generation, where <br />under the best present design nearly two-thirds of the <br />energy input is dissipated as waste heat, mostly through <br />evaporation of water. It should be noted that figure 4 <br />includes both refining and conversion processes; hence, <br />at least some of the fuel produced in oil refining <br />becomes energy input in fossil-fueled electric generation, <br />and the uranium fuel processed becomes energy input in <br />nuc1ear-electric generation. To this extent these water <br />requirements are additive in the total fuel cycle; how- <br />ever, much of the fossil-fuel product goes to other <br />energy uses such as transportation, space heating, and <br />industrial uses, and is not additive. Conversely, much of <br />the electric power is not used to produce heat (measured <br />in Btu's) but is used to make light or, in electric motors, <br />to perform work. The work output of electric motors <br />relative to input of electric current generally exceeds <br />80 percent compared to the efficiencies of engines using <br />fossil fuels which are generally less than 30 percent. The <br />comparatively large consumption of energy and water in <br />generating electricity is largely compensated for if the <br />electricity is used to produce torque. <br /> <br />Table 3.- Waler consumption in refining processes <br /> <br />Process and product <br /> <br />ReI11a1b <br /> <br />Consumptive use <br />(gallons per <br />10' Olu) <br /> <br />Ulanium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br /> <br />14.34 <br /> <br />Oil ..................._ <br />Pipeline gas nom coat. . . . . . <br /> <br />6.7 <br /> <br />a. Water cooling (90 <br />pelcent load Factor). <br /> <br />72-158 <br /> <br />b. Partial air cooling (90 <br />percent load Factor). <br />Synlhetic oil From coal. . . . . <br /> <br />37 -79 <br /> <br />31-200 <br /> <br />Oil from shale . . . . . . . . . . . . <br /> <br />19-29 <br /> <br />Reactor fuel for 1,000 mw nuclear plant annualized <br />For 80 percent load Factor. Includes water <br />consumed at power plants supplying electricity <br />For processing. <br />Aver.lge For U.S. refineries (Otts, 1963). <br />Lurgi gasification foUowed by melhanation stage. <br />Product about 1,000 Btu per standard cubic fool. <br />Con5Umption varies with amount of blowdown <br />required; directly proportional to mineral <br />content and turbidity of cooling supply. <br />Assumes 85 percent of cooling demand met by <br />nonevaporativc air cooling. <br />General estimate based on several potenlial <br />processes using pressure hydrogenation <br />technology. <br />Includes water requirement For spent shale disposal. <br /> <br />A lIerage waler consumption in electrical generation <br />I Most efficient design assumed; at 80 percent load Factor) <br /> <br />Process <br /> <br />Water consumption, <br />(gaUons per kwhr) <br /> <br />Water consumption (gaUons <br />per 10' Otu of electrical <br />output) <br /> <br />Fossil-fueled ........................... <br />Nuclear. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . ... . . .. . . . . <br />C..eothelmal .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br /> <br />0.5 <br />.8 <br />1.8 <br /> <br />146 <br />234 <br />527 <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.