Por fin publicamos la segunda parte del informe realizado por Gabriel Jurado sobre esta interesante fuente de energía:
(Existen dos maneras de extraer los hidratos desde las profundidades marinas):
La primera consistiría en disminuir la presión de los hidratos para desestabilizarlos y liberar el metano. Pero esto sólo se puede llevar a cabo en unas condiciones geológicas precisas, en las que se encuentre una bolsa de gas libre sepultada por los hidratos de metano. En este caso se inyectaría un gaseoducto a través de los hidratos de metano y al ir extrayendo el gas libre, la presión disminuiría y así se podría extraer también el metano que se fuera descomponiendo. Este procedimiento resulta costoso debido a que la capa de hidratos puede llegar a los 100 m. de espesor.
La segunda solución consiste en la propuesta de la empresa americana Precision Combustion (PCI). Esta empresa sugiere colocar en la superficie de los hidratos de metano unas calderas de su creación. Éstas podrían realizar una combustión controlada del 15% del metano para calentar el resto de los hidratos, liberando así el gas que podría ser transportado por un gaseoducto a la superficie. Esta combustión se podría llevar a cabo a bajas temperatura gracias a la presencia de un catalizador de platino.
El problema de ambas soluciones se debe a que la elevada compresión del metano en los hidratos ( ). Esto supone el riesgo de que al descomponerse los hidratos, no se pueda controlar la liberación de metano y se emitan a la atmósfera grandes cantidades de este gas, cuyo poder de efecto invernadero es ocho veces superior al , por lo que la temperatura se vería notablemente aumentada. Esta emisión también se podría producir por la desestabilización de los hidratos que estuviesen sepultando bolsas de gas libres por lo que las cantidades liberadas serían mucho mayores. El cambio climático juega un papel fundamental en esta desestabilización, ya que un aumento, poco significativo a nivel general, del nivel del mar, podría provocar la descomposición de los inestables hidratos de metano. Esto sucedió ya en el Pérmico, en el que la temperatura media terrestre alcanzó su máximo histórico provocando la mayor extinción de especies en la Tierra.
Existe, además, otro riesgo. Si no se controla adecuadamente esta combustión, se puede producir una combustión en cadena que, debido a las grandes cantidades de metano existentes, provocaría una explosión equiparable a la de una bomba atómica. La onda expansiva de esta explosión causaría gigantescos tsunamis que asolarían las costas.
Mi opinión, al contrario de lo que pueda parecer, no está en contra de la explotación de los hidratos de metano como recurso energético, ya que me parece que, tras el inminente agotamiento del petróleo, los hidratos de metano se convertirán en la principal fuente de energía, debido a su abundancia, su poder energético y a su limpieza con el medio ambiente.
Sin embargo, pienso que también es la que tiene mayor potencial de riesgo debido a las razones ya citadas, por lo que su explotación no permitirá los errores que se cometieron con la de otros recursos energéticos, por ejemplo, con el petróleo al plagar el mar del norte con los gigantes de hierro que se quedarán allí hasta la posterioridad.
Por esto espero que los países, y, en especial, las multinacionales energéticas, hayan aprendido de los errores pasados, y creen una organización mundial como la ONU que supervise, tomando las mayores precauciones posibles, la explotación de este, tan valioso como peligroso, recurso energético.
La segunda solución consiste en la propuesta de la empresa americana Precision Combustion (PCI). Esta empresa sugiere colocar en la superficie de los hidratos de metano unas calderas de su creación. Éstas podrían realizar una combustión controlada del 15% del metano para calentar el resto de los hidratos, liberando así el gas que podría ser transportado por un gaseoducto a la superficie. Esta combustión se podría llevar a cabo a bajas temperatura gracias a la presencia de un catalizador de platino.
El problema de ambas soluciones se debe a que la elevada compresión del metano en los hidratos ( ). Esto supone el riesgo de que al descomponerse los hidratos, no se pueda controlar la liberación de metano y se emitan a la atmósfera grandes cantidades de este gas, cuyo poder de efecto invernadero es ocho veces superior al , por lo que la temperatura se vería notablemente aumentada. Esta emisión también se podría producir por la desestabilización de los hidratos que estuviesen sepultando bolsas de gas libres por lo que las cantidades liberadas serían mucho mayores. El cambio climático juega un papel fundamental en esta desestabilización, ya que un aumento, poco significativo a nivel general, del nivel del mar, podría provocar la descomposición de los inestables hidratos de metano. Esto sucedió ya en el Pérmico, en el que la temperatura media terrestre alcanzó su máximo histórico provocando la mayor extinción de especies en la Tierra.
Existe, además, otro riesgo. Si no se controla adecuadamente esta combustión, se puede producir una combustión en cadena que, debido a las grandes cantidades de metano existentes, provocaría una explosión equiparable a la de una bomba atómica. La onda expansiva de esta explosión causaría gigantescos tsunamis que asolarían las costas.
Mi opinión, al contrario de lo que pueda parecer, no está en contra de la explotación de los hidratos de metano como recurso energético, ya que me parece que, tras el inminente agotamiento del petróleo, los hidratos de metano se convertirán en la principal fuente de energía, debido a su abundancia, su poder energético y a su limpieza con el medio ambiente.
Sin embargo, pienso que también es la que tiene mayor potencial de riesgo debido a las razones ya citadas, por lo que su explotación no permitirá los errores que se cometieron con la de otros recursos energéticos, por ejemplo, con el petróleo al plagar el mar del norte con los gigantes de hierro que se quedarán allí hasta la posterioridad.
Por esto espero que los países, y, en especial, las multinacionales energéticas, hayan aprendido de los errores pasados, y creen una organización mundial como la ONU que supervise, tomando las mayores precauciones posibles, la explotación de este, tan valioso como peligroso, recurso energético.
Methane hydrates: the solution to the problem or the problem of the solution (2)
The location of the deposits of methane hydrates is usually done with seismic reflection profiles, which are based on the picture of subsurface stratification based on the reflection of sound waves.
The extraction of this energy resource can be hampered by several factors. One of these reasons is the size of the grain of the sediment to which is usually associated, being more expensive, both technically and economically, as is the finest grain. Another factor is the nature of the sediments (iron, aluminum, etc..), This nature determines the ease of nucleation and crystallization of these chlathrates and, consequently, their subsequent decomposition.
The extraction of methane hydrates from the mantle is relatively simple. Actually, it is already underway in Siberia and in Alaska. The real problem arises when one wants to extract them from the seafloor, because you cannot use some simple pipelines or gas pipelines, as with petrol or natural gas, because hydrates are found in the solid state. There are two solutions for this: or direct injection of heat, because the application of heat from the surface would not be profitable because of the loss of energy that would mean the transmission of heat to the ocean depths.
The first solution would be to reduce the pressure of hydrates to destabilize and releasing methane. But this just can be carried out in a precise geological condition, which is a bag of free gas buried by methane hydrates. In this case a gas pipeline would go through methane hydrates to the free gas to extract it, and thus, lessening the pressure, methane hydrates would separate into its elements. This procedure is expensive because the hydrate layer can be up to 100 m. of thickness.
The second solution is the proposal by the American firm Precision Combustion (PCI). The company suggests placing on the surface of methane hydrates some catalytic combustors made by them. These combustors could make a controlled combustion of 15% methane to heat the rest of hydrates, thus the gas released could be transported by a gas pipeline to the surface. Burning could be made at low temperature due to the presence of a platinum catalyst.
The problem of both solutions is due to the high compression of methane hydrates ( ). This involves the risk that, when methane hydrates separate into its elements, it was not possible to control the release of methane and large amounts of this gas, whose power of the greenhouse effect is eight times higher than would be emitted into the atmosphere, so the temperature will be quite increased. This releasing could also be caused by the destabilization of hydrates that are burying bags of free gas, so the amounts released would be so much large. Climate change would play a key role in this destabilization, because an increase of sea temperature could cause the decomposition of volatile methane hydrates. This happened back in the Permian, when the average temperature reached a record high ground causing the biggest extinction of species on Earth.
In addition, there is another risk. If this combustion is not suitably controlled, it can produce a chain of combustion because of the large quantity of methane that exists. This would cause an explosion equivalent to an atomic bomb. The blast of this explosion would cause massive tsunamis that would affects costs.
From my point of view, contrary to what it may seem, I am not against the exploitation of methane hydrates as an energy resource, because I think that, after the imminent depletion of oil, methane hydrates will become the main source energy, due to its abundance, its power and its energy cleaning the environment.
However, I think it is also the one with the biggest potential risk because of the reasons I have already mentioned, so its development will not allow the mistakes that were made with other energy resources, for example, when the petrol companies set up many iron giants on the North Sea.
So I hope that countries, and especially energy multinational, have learned from past mistakes, and I hope them to create a global organization like the UNO to oversee, taking every caution, the exploitation of this, as valuable as dangerous, energy resource.
Gabriel Jurado
The location of the deposits of methane hydrates is usually done with seismic reflection profiles, which are based on the picture of subsurface stratification based on the reflection of sound waves.
The extraction of this energy resource can be hampered by several factors. One of these reasons is the size of the grain of the sediment to which is usually associated, being more expensive, both technically and economically, as is the finest grain. Another factor is the nature of the sediments (iron, aluminum, etc..), This nature determines the ease of nucleation and crystallization of these chlathrates and, consequently, their subsequent decomposition.
The extraction of methane hydrates from the mantle is relatively simple. Actually, it is already underway in Siberia and in Alaska. The real problem arises when one wants to extract them from the seafloor, because you cannot use some simple pipelines or gas pipelines, as with petrol or natural gas, because hydrates are found in the solid state. There are two solutions for this: or direct injection of heat, because the application of heat from the surface would not be profitable because of the loss of energy that would mean the transmission of heat to the ocean depths.
The first solution would be to reduce the pressure of hydrates to destabilize and releasing methane. But this just can be carried out in a precise geological condition, which is a bag of free gas buried by methane hydrates. In this case a gas pipeline would go through methane hydrates to the free gas to extract it, and thus, lessening the pressure, methane hydrates would separate into its elements. This procedure is expensive because the hydrate layer can be up to 100 m. of thickness.
The second solution is the proposal by the American firm Precision Combustion (PCI). The company suggests placing on the surface of methane hydrates some catalytic combustors made by them. These combustors could make a controlled combustion of 15% methane to heat the rest of hydrates, thus the gas released could be transported by a gas pipeline to the surface. Burning could be made at low temperature due to the presence of a platinum catalyst.
The problem of both solutions is due to the high compression of methane hydrates ( ). This involves the risk that, when methane hydrates separate into its elements, it was not possible to control the release of methane and large amounts of this gas, whose power of the greenhouse effect is eight times higher than would be emitted into the atmosphere, so the temperature will be quite increased. This releasing could also be caused by the destabilization of hydrates that are burying bags of free gas, so the amounts released would be so much large. Climate change would play a key role in this destabilization, because an increase of sea temperature could cause the decomposition of volatile methane hydrates. This happened back in the Permian, when the average temperature reached a record high ground causing the biggest extinction of species on Earth.
In addition, there is another risk. If this combustion is not suitably controlled, it can produce a chain of combustion because of the large quantity of methane that exists. This would cause an explosion equivalent to an atomic bomb. The blast of this explosion would cause massive tsunamis that would affects costs.
From my point of view, contrary to what it may seem, I am not against the exploitation of methane hydrates as an energy resource, because I think that, after the imminent depletion of oil, methane hydrates will become the main source energy, due to its abundance, its power and its energy cleaning the environment.
However, I think it is also the one with the biggest potential risk because of the reasons I have already mentioned, so its development will not allow the mistakes that were made with other energy resources, for example, when the petrol companies set up many iron giants on the North Sea.
So I hope that countries, and especially energy multinational, have learned from past mistakes, and I hope them to create a global organization like the UNO to oversee, taking every caution, the exploitation of this, as valuable as dangerous, energy resource.
Gabriel Jurado
Entradas
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario