METHANOL

Among substitute fuels that need no drastic modifications of present cars, the most hopeful is methanol, a member of the alcohol family (but not usable as booze). It is now made in small quantities from natural gas, but it could also be produced through coal gasification. Methanol pollutes far less than gasoline, in particular, there are no complications with lead or sulfur to confound the EPA-sponsored/ EPA-opposed catalytic converter.

Compared to gasoline, methanol has only one distinct technical disadvantage: Its heating value is 50% lower, which means fuel tanks 50% to 75% larger for the same range of the car. Why not twice as large? Because most of the various Muskeegons, Trainotrons and EPApoxes that now prey on a car engine to kill pollution, but mainly kill performance and fuel economy, could be junked. A methanol engine runs leaner and cleaner, and the compression ratios of yesteryear could return.

The main obstacle is economic, but Drs. Davison and Harris of Texas A&M, two years ago, found that in spite of the high capital costs of coalto-methanol plants, methanol could still pay off as the price of crude oil increases (AtE Jan.74).

In the report by Dr Werth and other LLL scientists mentioned last month, the problem is again considered. It is proposed to make methanol from synthesis gas produced by in-situ coal gasification.

An array of holes would be drilled to reach deeplying layers of coal (or oil shale) and the coal would be rubblized by detonating chemical explosives. The coal would then be ignited, and oxygen and water would be fed down to produce methane, carbon dioxide and hydrogen, all of which would come to the surface through exit wells. The methane could be used for pipeline-quality gas; the carbon dioxide and hydrogen would provide synthesis gas for an aboveground plant to produce methanol.

Except for some subsidence of the surface, the environmental impact would be negligible. Moreover, since there is no cost of mining or transporting the coal, and the technique uses resources otherwise unavailable (coal 500 to 3000 ft below the surface), it should be inexpensive.

The method has as yet not been tried in practice, and difficult technical problems are foreseen. But in view of the vulnerability of the vast US transportation system - all of its energy is ultimately derived from oil - Dr Werth and colleagues recommend vigorous research in this area.