Coal Gasification, Liquid

Fuel Conversion (CTL),

and Cogeneration
1
Prepared By: Farid Seif / CEO
DuTemp Corporation


Table of Contents

2
Introduction
Section I
Section IV
Section II
Section III
Section V
Section VI
DuTemp Corporation
Plasma Arc Reactors
Plasma Arc Process
DuTemp Business Model & Costs
DuTemp Plasma Arc Flow Charts
Introduction to Plasma Arc Technology
Current Gasification Technologies
Section VI Case Study Illinois
Who We Are
DuTemp Corporation provides the owners representative management function normally provided by
executives of major oil refining companies addressing all of the applicable and typical issues and phases
involved in a project of this nature. Our capabilities come from years of working in refining related areas.

These areas include:

refinery project development;
greenfield and revamped refinery project startup;
crude and product supply and coordination;
refinery operations, maintenance, staffing and organizational development.

With this function, significant expertise is provided in areas of refining markets, grass roots refining
configuration and project development, efficient manning and operations, and possibly most important,
refining engineering problem solutions not addressed by other engineering firms.

This expertise consists of smaller issue-specialized analytical capabilities derived form former oil
executives, refinery managers, engineering managers and project construction executives who are willing
to contribute to the project's success. A number of our individuals have prior greenfield refinery project
development experience in major refining complexes around the world.
3
DuTemps Performance Guarantee
DuTemp Corporation will GUARANTEE the Performance of its
Plants against the Benchmarks set by FEED Study;
In the event of Plant Performances not meeting the Benchmarks set
by FEED Study, DUTEMP RETURNS 100% OF INVESTMENT
WITHOUT ANY QUESTIONS;
DuTemps Financial Guarantees are Tradable Instrument from AA
Rated Bank. The said instrument maybe any of following:
Bank Guarantee (BG)
Bank Promissory Note
Medium Term Note (MTN) with up to 7.5% interest coupon
Equal to Amount of Investment (DuTemps Choice)
DuTemp builds its Plants under Standard Guarantee requirements
mandated by the Hosting State/Country;
DuTemp Corporation is the ONLY Company in the World that
provides Performance Guarantee and Financial Guarantees
towards Plasma Arc Reactor.
DuTemps Plants design exceeds all emission mandates set by US-
EPA, European Union, IMF, World Bank and WTO and will meet all
ISO Certifications.
4
PLASMA ARC TECHNOLOGY
Section I
5
Plasma Arc Technology
WHAT IS PLASMA?

Fourth State of Matter,
Ionized Gas Created by Converting
Electrical Energy into Thermal Energy,
Creates Extremely High Temperature /
Energy Levels,
Thermal Arc at 30,000 to 33,000 Degrees
Fahrenheit,
Fourth State of Matter,
Ionized Gas at High Temperature Capable
of Conducting,
Lightening is an Example from Nature.
6
Chemistry
Basic Chemistry
Matter is made up of molecules

Molecules are two or more
atoms held together

Atoms are held together Atomic
Bonds

Atomic Bonds have a certain
amount of energy the Bond
Energy

If the Bond Energy is exceeded,
the Bond Breaks
Plasma Chemistry
With these high temperatures
(above 2,250 Degree Fahrenheit),
molecules exposed to a plasma are
ionized and broken into individual
atoms.

These atoms can then be re-
combined into simple compounds
when temperature is lowered.

It does not matter what molecule is
exposed to plasma, all will
dissociate.
7
Plasma Arc Technology
PYROLYSIS:

Without Oxygen, materials in furnace dont combust,

Pyrolysis Dissociation of Compounds into their elemental atoms
and reforming them into a fuel gas-referred as Reversed Nano
Gasification.

Oxygen is a by-product and not part of Process versus
Incineration /Atmospheric Gasifiers that requires Oxygen (all
others).

Oxygen is not part of the process but a by-product.

8
Plasma IS More Efficient


Plasma is more efficient than older methods of gasification.

The Carbon to Carbon Bonds are more difficult to break. This can
not be done easily in conventional Atmospheric Gasifiers due to their
low temperatures that is why Char is formed. Plasma breaks these
bonds so all of the carbon is converted.

The Plasma Reaction is Endothermic. Therefore, all of the Energy
required for the process is available for recovery later.
9
Plasma Arc Technology Remediation Experience
Heavy Metals

Radioactive Wastes

Industrial Sludges

Municipal Solid Waste

Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Liquid / Solid Organic Wastes

PCBs

Spent Fuel (Rods)

Asbestos

Chemical Wastes

Medical Wastes

Plastics

Used Tires

Coals (Hi Sulphur / Low Grade)

Heavy Crude Oil

Bio Hazardous

Bio-Radioactive

10
Syngas By-Products
The following is a short list of products directly derived from Syngas:
Middle Distillates:
107 to 125 Octane Near Pure Bio-Gasoline
75 to 77 Cetane Near Pure Bio-Diesel
Jet Fuel 1 to 8 Near Pure Form
Naphtha, Paraffin, LPG
Ammonia
Urea
Ammonium Sulfate
Hydrogen
Dimethyl Ether
Ethanol
Various Ox chemicals Used in Paint Manufacture
Butyraldehyde
Butanol
2-Ethylhexanol
Di-octyl-phthalate
Carboxylic Acids
Polymers: Ethyl, Ethylene, Polyethylene, Propylene, Polypropylene, Styrene, etc..

11
GASI FI FACTI ON TECHNOLOGI ES
Section II
12
How Many Gasification Technologies Are Out
There?
1. ATMOSPHERIC GASIFIER OR HYBRID INCINERATION USING FLAME AND STARVED OF
OXYGEN.

2. ATMOSPHERIC GASIFIER OR HYBRID INCINERATION USES PLASMA TORCH AND STARVED
OF OXYGEN.

3. PLASMA TORCH TECHNOLOGY WITH ENCLOSED REACTORS AND GASIFICATION IN
ABSENCE OF OXYGEN

4. DUTEMP/ATONN SYSTEM: PYROLYSIS IN ABSENCE OF OXYGEN WITHIN ENCLUSED
REACTOR.
13
Atmospheric Gasifier or Hybrid Incineration using Flame
and Starved of Oxygen

Atmospheric Gasifier or Hybrid Incineration using flame and starved of Oxygen manufactured
by: GE, Shell, Conoco, Chevron, Texaco, Sasol, Eastman Kodak, Chinese Low Temp, Gasifier,
(hereinafter: others) cannot meet EPA mandates and requires CO2 sequestering.

Low rate of conversion up to 32% of Carbon Molecules.

Operating Temperature is less than 1700 degrees Fahrenheit producing Furans, Dioxins, CO
and CO2 during gasification process.

System could go in reveres at any time that will cause shut down and re-starting.

Requires land-filling, massive scrubbing and gas cleanup.

Produced Syngas is not clean. Use of Amine unit for CO2 separation considered very
challenging/expensive as the impurities in produced Syngas will shut down the Amine Unit.
Finished products contain contamination and not very clean.

14
Atmospheric Gasifier or Hybrid Incineration uses Plasma
Torch and Starved of Oxygen
Atmospheric Gasifier or Hybrid Incineration uses plasma torch and starved of Oxygen
manufactured by: Westinghouse currently owned by Plasco Energy Group of Canada and
marketed by Green Energy Technologies of Florida, (hereinafter: others) CANNOT meet
EPA mandates and requires CO2 sequestering.

Low rate of conversion- up to 32% of Carbon Molecules.

Operating Temperatures is about or less than 1700 degrees Fahrenheit producing Furans,
Dioxins CO and CO2 during gasification process.

System could go in reveres at any time that will cause shut down and re-starting.

Requires land-filling, massive scrubbing and gas cleanup. Produced SynGas is not clean.

Use of Amine Unit for CO2 separation considered very challenging/expensive as the impurities
in produced SynGas shut down the Amine Unit.

15

Plasma Torch Technology with enclosed Reactors and
Gasification in Absence of Oxygen


Plasma Torch Technology with enclosed Reactors and Gasification in absence of Oxygen
marketed by others, can meet all EPA mandates and does not require CO2 sequestering.

Excellent systems for small applications when quick On and Off (such as Hazmat) is required

Operating temperatures is over 2650 degrees Fahrenheit thus Furans, Dioxins will not form.

Conversion rate of Carbon Molecules is 88% or better and does not require land-filling.

All by-products are saleable.

Produced Syngas is very clean and near pure form.

Amine unit works properly to its maximum life expectancy.

System could go in reveres seldom that will cause shut down and re-starting.

16


DuTemp/ATONN Systems: Pyrolysis in absence of
Oxygen within Enclosed Reactor:

ATONN system: Pyrolysis in absence of Oxygen within enclosed reactor, jointly developed in
NASA and U.S Governments labs. Patents were released by year 2000.

Can meet/exceed all current/future air and water permit requirements/mandates.

Excellent system for large operations where the reactor can stay on continuously for a year or
more.

Conversion rate of Carbon Molecules is 98% or better and does not require land-filing.

All by-products are saleable. Produced Syngas is very clean and near pure form therefore
Amine Unit works properly to its maximum life expectancy.

U.S Government has been the primary user of ATONN Reactors with over 30 years experience.

Massive Data for different applications including Coal processing has been collected by DOE,
DOD, EPA, NASA, Los-Alamos Lab. Current use by U.S Government.
17
DuTemp CTL Plants DO NOT Differentiate Between
the Quality of the Coal
DuTemp CTL plants do not differentiate between the quality of coal. Our concern is
the actual chain of Carbon Molecules. Our process is not combustion but Pyrolysis
or the dissociation of molecules or breaking apart of Molecular Bonds.



18
PLASMA ARC REACTORS
Section III
19
Standard Atmospheric Gasifier by Others,
NOT Plasma Arc Enclosed Reactors
20
Some of the Advantages of Plasma Arc Reactor
DOES NOT Differentiate between the Quality of Feedstock;

ANY TYPE of Carbon is Considered Feedstock;

Moisture in Coal is a Plus in this Process;

Coals BTUs are NOT Important in this Process since it is NOT Combustion;

In the Absence of Primary Feedstock, Plant can Switch to Other Sources of carbon
base materials

Feedstock without Limitation;

Can Produce Electricity, Liquid Fuels or BOTH;

The Plant can be easily Expanded without Major Transformation of Original
Installations.

21
Plasma Torch in Enclosed Reactor

Can meet the US-EPA Emission Guidelines,
Produces NO Greenhouse Gas,
Produces 10% or more Slag (pending % of in-organics) for
Every Ton of Feedstock that Converts to Rockwool,
Has the Ability to Recover Metals in Slab Form,
$42,000 Per Barrel on Gasifier Only,
Extremely High Maintenance and Expense Due to Short Life
Cycle of Torch,
Operating Cost for MSW is $440 per Ton and for Coal is
$800 per Ton,
Maximum Life Cycles are:
30 Days on Torch to Replace the Copper-Head and
Torch Replacement,
Every 6 to 12 months the Torch must be Revamped,
Every year the Reactor must be Maintained,
Reactor Life-cycle is 30 plus years,
30 Months to Implement
22
Plasma Arc Enclosed Reactors (Controlled Process)
Exceed All the Current US-EPA Emission Guidelines;
Zero Emissions from Reactors, Zero Wastewater Discharges;
Produce 10% b to 30% slag (pending % of in-organics) for every Ton of Coal that
Convert to Rockwool or Gypsum;
Metal Recovery is Viable when its Presence is 2% plus in the feedstock;
Every Liquid fuel/Polymer By-Products from Syngas are Near Pure (with
Exception of Trace Elements of Catalysts from the Conversion of Syngas to Liquid
Forms in PPM/PPB);
Construction cost is $33,000 per Barrel on Reactor Facilities Only;
Extremely Low Maintenance Cost Due to the Long Life Cycle (50 years);
Maintenance Cost Less Than $2.0 Million per Reactor per year (1000 MT/Day);
Operating Cost for MSW is between $17 to $22 per MT and Coal is up to $65 per
MT but can be reduced significantly in larger operations;
Maximum Life-cycle is 50 years before major revamp;
Every 12 to 18 months requires Maintenance and Graphite Rods replacement in a
12 day Maintenance Shut Down;
Manufacturing and Installation is between 24 to 30 Months.
23
Plasma Arc Technology
The End Product from the Reactor are Always the Same. The
Ratios may Vary depending on Changes in Chemistry or carbon
chains.

WHAT GOES IN MUST COME OUT..

ORGANICS: Turn to Syngas as a Fuel or Chemical Raw Material;

INORGANICS: Turn to Vitreous Slag that is Non-Leaching and
exceeds EPA Tests;

METALS: Are Recoverable in Ingots or Billets in Reducing
Environment.
24
Plasma Arc Process and Its Finished Products

SYNGAS: Mainly Hydrogen and Carbon Monoxide.
Significant Raw Material;

SLAG: Can be Spun into Rockwool for Insulation,
Fibers have Multiple Uses (Hydroponics,
Tiles, etc), Turn to Frit for Blasting Media,
Cast into Tiles or Used as Aggregate;

METALS: Pig Iron, Billets. Very Easy to Analyze
and Provide Chemical Certification.
25
Coal the Most Abundant Fossil Fuel in the World..
LOCATION OF THE WORLDS MAIN FOSSIL FUEL RESERVES


26
PLASMA ARC PROCESS
Section IV
27
Heat Balance

The Carbon content of average Coal (on net basis) will dissociate or thermally
depolymerise into 180,000 to 196,000 cubic feet of synthesis gas per net ton, having an
energy value of 300 BTU per standard cubic foot of gas.
The heat rate for ATONN combined cycle power generating system is expected to be
about 42.277 or lower, generating 8,160 kW per ton of Coal that is processed.
The processing of 1000 tons of Net Coal per day or 41 tons per hour will release 8,118,000
cubic feet of synthesis gas per hour with a total BTU value of 2,435,400,000 BTU/HR.
At a heat rate of 7,277 the ATONN combined cycle gas turbine system will generate a
gross of 334.56 Megawatts of Electricity per hour, twenty-four hours a day.
When we deduct 104 Megawatts of this electric current to maintain the plasma arc and for
other plant requirements, we are left with available supply to the grid of 230.56 Megawatts
per hour (5,533.44 Megawatts per day).
Heat Recovery through Freon Driven Turbines are added value and can increase the power
production between 5% to 7%.




Disclaimer: All above numbers must be verified through FEED Study and Turbine selection.


28
CO2 Capturing
Gas separation occurs 2 times during the Syngas production process: right after
gasification itself and during burning the Syngas for power generation purposes.
DuTemp Reactors will separate most impurities up front during the gasification
itself. Therefore, there are less pollutants in produced Syngas versus the
Atmospheric Gasification which cannot scrub out any impurities during first phase
of gasification and must goes through expensive clean-up in a later phases through
scrubbing techniques that are proven too costly. In the said system (by others),
produced Syngas (only up to 32% conversion rate based on the carbon molecules) is
highly contaminated with all different components including lots of CO, CO2,
Sulphur and Metals due to uncompleted process. The presence of such impurities
make it very difficult and expensive to manage the Syngas Clean Up.
In order to separate the CO2 from the smoke-stack, the plant must be equipped with:
Alkyl base Amine Unit , or
Membrane Base Amine Unit
Both type of Amine Units will shut down with the presence of impurities, especially
metals in the processed gas.
The gases produced in our power plants would not effect the performance or
efficiency of Amine Units as there are no impurities present in the gas (Impurities
are scrubbed out upfront and in the reactor and water filtration).
29
CO2 Capturing (contd)

CO2 separation success rate in in ATONN systems' power generation Smoke-Stack
is 98% or better that it is far below US-EPA mandates.
All other known systems including Atmospheric Units (such as GE, Duke, Shell,
Texaco, Sasol, Conoco, Chinese Gasifies, Eastman Kodak) or those using
Atmospheric Units with Plasma Torch (Westinghouse Systems and most others
claiming they are selling Plasma Technologies(, cannot use the Amine Units
efficiently due to impurities in their produced Syngas (first phase) and in their
Smoke Stack (second phase) that will cause Amine shut down quickly. The
captured CO2 requires sequestering process due to hi contaminants and difficulties
with Amine process.
CO2 sequestering is experimental, expensive and not a viable solution for 21
st

century.
When the costs of Scrubbing and sequestering are added to a project value
(CAPEX), the project financially is bankrupt.
It is our opinion that the U.S Government shall not be responsible for CO2
Sequestering or its associated costs as it will permit bad practices.
30
How to Eliminate Nox, reduce CO2 Foot Print and Increase
Efficiency in Power Plants?
DuTemp will consider using the following blends of gases in its power
generation units:
40% Syngas
12% Hydrogen
48% Pure Oxygen
No Air is permitted in the Power Plants fire chamber thus no Nox.

With Using this Model, your finished products from the Smoke-Stack are:
Near Pure Water that will be recycled back to the Plasma Reactor or Hydrogen
Plant for self consumption;
Steam through use of Freon Driven Turbines, its heat is extracted to produce
electricity and also the steam will be condensed to produce more water.
Near pure CO2 will be captured by Amine Unit for sale. If no market for sale, CO2
will be recycled back to Plasma Reactor.
This balance is not possible with any other fuel for power generation except near
pure Syngas produced in DuTemps Reactors.

31
Leach ability of Vitrified Coal Residue (TCLP) by US-EPA
Metal Permissible
Concentration (mg/l)
Measured
Concentration (mg/l)
Arsenic 5.0 <0.1
Barium 100.0 <0.5
Cadmium 1.0 <0.02
Chromium 5.0 <0.2
Lead 5.0 <0.2
Mercury 0.2 <0.01
Selenium 1.0 <0.1
Silver 5.0 <0.5
32
Syngas Properties By US-EPA
Total Vapor
Flow rate Lbmol/hr 3731.9294 3731.9294
Molecular Weight 13.2391 13.2391
Enthalpy Btu/lbmole 473.6162 473.6162
Entropy Btu/lbmo/R 2.4659 2.4659
Cp Btu/lbmol/R 7.0096
Cv Btu/lbmol/R 5.0181
Cp/Cv 1.3969
Density Lb/ft3 0.034993
Z-Factor 1.0005
Flow rate (T-P) Ft3/sec 392.2015
Flow rate (STP) Mmscfd 33.9839
Viscosity cP 0.014973
Thermal Conductivity Btu/ft/hr/F 0.054064
Critical Temperature (Cubic EO) F 705.2
Critical Pressure (Cubic EOS) psia 3198.8
Heating Value (gross) Btu/scf 307.89
Heating Value (net) Btu/scf 277.35
Dew Point Temperature F 100
Bubble Temperature F -379.67
33
Sample Emissions Data From Plasma Treatment Process








DATA OBTAINED FROM PLASMA TREATMENT OF MEDICAL WASTE BY US-EPA

34
TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Plasma Terminal
Treatment System
Typical Incinerators US EPA
Regulations
SYSTEM
C
O
N
C
E
N
T
R
A
T
I
O
N

(
m
g
/
d
s
c
m
)
BUSI NESS MODELS & COSTS
Section V
35
Business Model - I
Coal Conversion Plant through Plasma Arc Reactor to convert 2000 to 3000 MT/day of net
Coal and produce 530 MWH to 720 MWH Electricity, (all numbers are assumptions and not
valid until evaluated through FEED Study);

The Coal Conversion facilities will be designed for 24/7/365 operation by using one spare
additional Reactor for maintenance;

Total Reactors are either 5 x 1000 MT/day or 7 x 1000 MT/day (Size of Reactors processing
capacities are based on MSW. When consuming Coal, processing will be reduced by 50% of
its actual feeding capacity but the SynGas production is 4 to 6 times higher);

One Reactor is on Standby for the maintenance of Other Reactors working on-line;

Power Generation Equipment may vary, but for this assumption, we propose 3 x GE Frame-
7FA or Dual GE Frame-9FA Power Plants;

Secondary Power Generation through Freon/Propane Driven Turbines are viable and increases
the yield between 5% to 7% (additional investment required).
36
Business Model - I / Advantages
Near Zero Emission from Plasma Reactors;

Very Low Emissions from the Power Plants;

Zero Fly Ash, No Mercury, etc.

Produced CO2 from burning the Syngas in Power Plant are free of any impurities and 98% of CO2 can be
captured for sale in pure form or can be recycled back into the Plasma Reactor as feedstock in absence of
market demand;

No Land-filling, No Residuals, All By-Products are Marketable;

No need for Cooling Towers and thus, less Water Consumption; Water quality for usage is not important.

50 years Life Expectancy on Plasma Reactors;

Price Tag is about $1.2 Million to $1.4 Million per MW of Power or between $720 Million to $840 Million for
Plant with Power Generation capacity of 530 MWH to 720 MWH (must be verified through FEED Study);

The Cost of Implementation is 1/3 less than IGCC configuration with Atmospheric Gasifier by Others such as
Sasol, Shell, GE, etc..
37
Business Model - II
Two Step Construction of a 250,000 bbl/day Coal to Liquid (CTL) Facility;

Feedstock: any types of Coal Deposits

First Phase: 8000 MT/day Net Coal to produce 50,000 bbl/day Liquid Fuels and
100 MW/HR Electricity for export to the Grid;
Second Phase: Additional 26,000 MT/day Net Coal to produce 200,000 bbl/day of
Liquid Fuels and 300 MWH Electricity;

Types of Fuels in First Phase: All Bio Diesel, Gasoline, Jet Fuel

Second Phase Fuel Production: Additional Core Products including C-3 to C-15
for secondary manufacturing.

Plants required land is between 220 acres to 500 acres with Buffer zone mandated
by Local Codes and State Regulations.
38
Plasma CTL Process by DuTemp
39
DATE
11/01/07
BY
JH
PROJECT P102
DuTemp Coal To Liquids Plant
DuTemp Corporation
SIMPLIFIED
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
210-1556
+
Coal
Feeder
Slurry
210-1403
FV
HP
Steam
2
1
0
- 1
1
0
7
FV
TV
F
V
Quench
210-1511
CW
2
1
0
-
1
2
0
2
210-1536
210-1326
PV
P
V
To Flare
PV
OFFGAS
OFFGAS
210-1537
LV
LV
%
s3015
5,1
82
ID
E
T
a
n
g
e
nt
17
,
955
A
1
A
2
D
510
610
610
2420
1525
4550
1525
By
B
5
B
2
PSA
ADSORBER
BEDS
PC
FC PC
PC
623
660
210-1230
2
1
0
- 1
2
3
1
210-1556
2
1
0
- 1
1
1
0
CW
210-1385
LV
s1410
210-1555
s
1
4
1
2
210-1335
+
s1419
.
%
LV
s
1
4
1
6
s1407
FV
s1421
s1420
11-T-101
11-T-101
11-T-101
11-T-101
MCC
Fame 7FA
Steam Turbine
Steam Turbine Fame 7FA
Power
Plant
Plasma Unit
Fischer-Tropsch
CCR Platformer
Amine Unit
Compression Unit
Diesel
Gasoline
To Amine Unit
FromAmine Unit
Recycle from
FT Reactors
5,1
82
ID
E
T
a
n
g
e
nt
17
,
955
A
1
A
2
D
510
610
610
2420
1525
4550
1525
By
B
5
B
2
5,1
82
ID
E
T
a
n
g
e
nt
17
,
955
A
1
A
2
D
510
610
610
2420
1525
4550
1525
By
B
5
B
2
Preliminary Flow
Diagram
Size Does Matter
No Other Company is proposing gasification plants using plasma over 1500
barrels per day production from processing 300 MT/day Coal due to their reactor
size restrictions. Such an operation is not feasible to the market place and does not
impact it in any way or shape.

DuTemp proposes to start with a 50,000 barrels per day production unit through
processing 8000 MT/day of net Coal that can easily be ramped-up to 250,000
barrels per day plants using 33,000 MT/day net Coal. Such an implementation
would gets the markets attention as it is making a statement with its operational
size.

The most difficult aspect of fuel production after producing near pure Syngas is
the Compression Units prior to FT process (Liquid Phase). This has been
solved by DuTemp while still a major obstacle for others;

Bigger Plants are more efficient due to the ability to use larger frame power plants.
When comparing the GE LM6000 with Frame-9FA, the Frame-9FA is 300% more
efficient with while consuming the same amount of SynGas.
40
Cost of Construction Per Plant

$33,000+ plus per Barrel on Reactors
$22,000+ plus per Barrel on GTL Vessels
First Phase Investment: $2.45+ Billion
Second Phase: $4.8+ plus Billion
(can be self-financed against the income of first phase after 6 months in
operation)
Total Cost for 250,000 bbl/day: $7.25+ plus Billion
Storage Facilities: 15 days
Storage Target Capacity: 90 Days through additional investment.

41
Conversion on $$ Basis
One Ton of average Quality Coal is up to $50 USD delivered to Plant;
One Ton of Standard Specs Liquid Fuel being made from Crude Oil is about $700
USD/Ton;
One Ton of CTL Fuel with Near Pure Specs is above $1500+ USD/Ton;
GTL Products are being made from Natural Gas (NG) only at this time;
The Three Major Producers of GTL Products in the world are: Qatar, Iran & Saudi
Arabia while U.S. is a net importer of these products at this time,
There has been Limited Production of GTL in the World due to the High Price of NG in
the past;
GTL/CTL Products are Primary Additive Components for Refiners as Octane and
Cetane boosting components;
Octane and Cetane boosting processes in Refineries are the most costly and dangerous
part of refining;
Refiners are the Main Importers of GTL Fuels around the World;
CTL Plant can complement the Refiners Daily Operations and Reduce their cost of
Importation that will be passed to their consumers;
Coal to Liquid Plants compete directly with Gas to Liquid Plants (GTL);
CTL production costs are 1/3 less than GTL production costs due to lower price of
feedstock.

42
Strategic Storage Facilities

If and When the Investor can build and maintain 90 days fuel storage base on 5.0
Million bbls/day usage, it will become a strategic reserve in and around the world;
50 million barrels storage facility would control the prices in the market place,

Governments and Refiners may consider a monthly rental agreement for such
reserves in excess of $10.0 Million plus per month;

Storage Shelf Life: Diesel Gasoline Jet-Fuel
From Refineries: 6 Months 6 Months 6 Months
From CTL Plants: 8 Years 8 Years 8 Years

Biodegradable from Standard Refineries: NO
Biodegradable from CTL Plant: YES
43
Other Components From Syngas Downstream Productions
The ox synthesis process is also known as hydroformylation. It involves
the reaction of CO and H2 with olefinic hydrocarbons to form an
isomeric mixture of normal and isoaldehydes.

It is an industrial synthetic route for the conversion of olefins (in the C3-
C15 range) to produce solvents, synthetic detergents, flavorings,
perfumes and other healthcare products, and other high value commodity
chemicals.

Over 2000 components can be made from these chains;

Toys made from Syngas components are free of all hazardous materials.
This is a $33.0 Billion USD per year industry.
44
Production Costs Comparison

Production Costs Comparable with Saudi Arabia


Saudi Arabia Exxon Valero CTL

Feedstock Costs $2 bbl $18 bbl $65 bbl $7 bbl
Processing Costs $7 bbl $6 bbl $5 bbl $7 bbl
Transportation $4 bbl $3 bbl $0 bbl $1.5 bbl

Total $13 bbl $27 bbl $70 bbl $15.5 bbl

Return on Investment from CTL Plants is minimum 85% per year. This is a A+
rated project.

45
Comparative Diesel Qualities & Standards
Production Ratio from CTL Plant
ITEM Commercial CA CTL Diesel US-EPA 2006

Cetane Index > 32 > 48 > 70 > 46
Aromatics (vol%) < 35 < 100 0 < 35
Sulphur (wt%) < .30 < .050 0 < .0015

Ratio of Products from CTL Plants.
Diesel: 60%
Gasoline: 35%
Jet Fuel: 15%

There are up to 15% other components from FT process such as NAPHTHA and Paraffin that
is being recycled back to the Plasma Reactor in the first phase plant.

Part of the process to remove Sulphur from Coal is through adding Oxidants/Fluxes such as
Lime or Limestone, etc. However, one of the best components for this portion of the process is
the use of sludge from waste water that we hope to be used in our plant.
46
DUTEMPS FLOW CHARTS
Section VI
47
Table of Contents
Bio-Radioactive Waste to Electricity
Coal to Electricity
General Feed Stocks to Liquid Fuels
MSW Tires Oils to Electricity
Coal to Ethanol
Coal to Liquid Fuels
Hudson River Sludge / PCB Mercury Treatment Plant
Municipal Solid Waste of Coal to Diesel via Cobalt Catalyst
Turning Municipal Solid Waste / Tires to Liquid Fuels
Pet Coke Liquid Fuels
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
CASE STUDY: I LLI NOI S
Section VI
59
Comparative Diesel Qualities & Standards
Production Ratio from Illinois Plant
60
Item Commercial California CTL Diesel US-EPA
2006
Cetane Index >32 >48 >70 >46
Aromatics
(vol%)
<35 <100 0 <3
Sulphur
(wt%)
<0.30 <0.050 0 <0.0015
Ratio of Products from Illinois
Diesel: 60%
Gasoline: 35%
Jet Fuel: 15%

There are up to 15% other components from FT process such as
NAPHTHA and Paraffin that is being recycled back to the Plasma
Reactor in the first phase plant.

Part of process to remove Sulphur from coal is through adding
Oxidants/fluxes such as Lime or limestone, etc. However, one of the
best components for this portion of process is the use of sludge from
wastewater plants that we hope to be used in our plant.

61
Summary

DuTemp proposes to conduct a Front End Engineering and Design (FEED) study for Illinois
Coal,
Part of FEED study would be to gasify 1 Metric Ton of Coal in a Plasma Reactor and log all data,
Produce computer modeling for plants operation to verify the viability of processes and set all the
performance benchmarks,
Cost to produce the FEED study is equal to 1.5% of projects value + $2.5 M USD,
To produce the FEED study for Illinois CTL plants first phase, a funding requirement of $27.0 M
is needed from the Government or others or;
To produce the FEED study for Illinois power plants first phase, a funding requirement of $12.0
M is needed from the Government or others ,
Duration for this study is 6 to 8 months,
This study will be conducted by DuTemp and will be re-stamped by Jacob, Fluor or Stone &
Webster,
DuTemp will reimburse this cost upon conclusion of financing. However, through support of Coal
Bond or Industrial Revenue Bonds, this fee is paid by bonds in advance or;
DuTemp is willing to assume 50% of its cost if the structure is base on JV Partnership with the
Government,
DuTemp is open to dialogue. This is just a scenario and it is not final position of DuTemp.
We request a check to DuTemp.

62
During the FEED, The Following is Completed:
Process
Major Equipment Definition
Process Simulation and Modeling
Process Flow Diagram Development
Mechanical Equipment Data Sheet Development
Process Written Description
Preliminary Process Data
Preliminary Line List
Develop P & IDs

Piping
Preliminary Estimate of Large Bore Pipe
Participate in P & ID Development
Valve Drag for Estimate
Get Quotes on Pipe and Valves

Mechanical
Prepare RFQ and Issue for Major Equipment
Get Quotes from Vendors on All Major Equipment

Civil
Preliminary Pile Counts
Preliminary Drawings for All Major Structures
Grey Steel Estimate
Cement Estimate
Control Systems
Quotes for DCS and SIS Systems
Quotes on All Inline Instruments
10% Estimate on All Instruments

Electrical
MCC Preliminary Design
Quote from Powel or GE on the Building with All
Equipment Inside
Rough Count of All Motors, Cables, and Cable Trays
10% Estimate

Computer Modeling
Computer Modeling will Verify the Performance of
All Equipments and Validate the Process in Real
Time Operation.
This Report, will establish All Performance
Benchmarks, Processing Data, Air Emission, and
Water Quality Benchmarks for Permitting to be
submitted to EPA.
All Guarantees are Issued based on Results from
this Report.

Estimating
Adds Construction Costs, including Labor,
Transportation, and All Field Expense Rolls, All
Disciplines Estimates to One Total Installed Cost
Estimate Including: Engineering, Material Costs and
Construction.

63
World Energy Facts
There is only one empire in Worlds Energy Markets Middle East
CTL Plants can offset this balance when it reaches the processing capacity of 150,000 plus Metric Ton
Coal per day;
Eventually the current price of Crude will tumble with these new alternative plants;
To permanently defuse OPEC influence in world energy, Investors must investor in one million
barrels per day production of CTL components;
Total fuel consumption will be over 40% Bio-Fuels by year 2020;
Upon the first implementation, the stock market will shift its financial resources toward Coal
Gasification;
We forecast the implementation of over 1.0 Million bbl/day CTL plants by the year 2015 with proper
funding that can consume 150,000 MT/day low quality Coal;
DuTemp has manufacturing capacity to reach this goal by year 2018;
Secondary manufacturing will obsolete China as a major exporter to the U.S;
Investors can offer high paying jobs and still compete with China and S. Korea manufacturers;
Investors will be able to reach the entire North America through its Hub Networks;
Investors combined in CTL projects will create up to 2.0 Million high scale manufacturing jobs by
2018 in other manufacturing sectors when it is planned correctly;
Same combined projects will create additional 6,000,000 jobs in service industry by 2018;
Regions main income will be based on export and the health of the economy will be guaranteed until
year 2050;
CTL combined projects when all completed, will increase the Export on manufactured products by
30%.
64
Power Generation by Others
MORE PROOF THAT COAL AINT CHEAP
Duke wins approval for a $3100 / kW Plant
Posted by Sean Casten at 1:54 PM on 27 Nov 2007
From E & E News ($ub reqd): Indiana has approved a $2 Billion, 630 MW integrated gasification / combined
cycle coal plant.
Two Billion divided by 630 MW = $3,174 / kW
If we assume that Coal Equity Investors expect to recover their investment over 20 years with an eleven percent
return, that works out to 5.7 cents / kWh just to pay off the capital for the power plant. Add in another 3 cents or
so for transmission and distribution, and a couple cents for fuel and operating costs, and this plant will work out to
be over 10 cents in retail prices.
This in a state where the current average retail electric rate is 6.79 cents / kWh.
So why was it approved? Simple:
In the Midwest, Coal is plentiful and low-cost, and finding ways to burn it cleanly is fundamental to
meeting our customers demand for power, Duke Energy Indiana President Jim Stanley said in a
statement. The head spins.
Excerpts of the story below the fold.
Indiana utility regulators approved Duke Energys proposed $2 billion coal-fired power plant equipped with
advanced pollution controls about 100 miles southwest of Indianapolis.
The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission decision followed more than two years of planning by Dukes Indiana
subsidiary and its predecessor, Cinergy/PSI Indiana, which was acquired by duke in May 2006.
The 630-megawatt, integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant, which still must obtain permits from the
Indiana Department of Environmental Management, could begin construction in Knox County early next year
with an expected startup in early 2012, Duke Officials said.

Note: Please se financial figures of $3.1 Million USD per MW power plants cost but recently was increased
again.


65
Thank you for your time


For additional information contact:

DuTemp Corp.
Phone: 832-358-2600
Email: ceo@dutemp.com
66