Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003) 473479

www.cleanerproduction.net

Market opportunities for coal gasification in China

T. Attwood , V. Fung, W.W. Clark
Global Greenlife Institute, 7A/F International Industrial Building 501-503, Castle Peak Road, Kln, Hong Kong, PR China

Abstract

Coal gasification is a technology that has been around for 200 yr. With the recent technology advances in the past 20 yr, it has
become an option for the clean production of power and other energy forms. China will continue to be the largest user of coal in
the world. Coal is the source of energy in almost every area of everyday life in China. This paper is an overview of the prospects
of coal gasification in China. It discusses the opening of Chinese markets to more private sector participation. In particular the
paper focuses on the energy sector and coal as the both an economic development variable and a factor in climate change. Clean
coal technologies can be apart of the production cycle in China and hence can impact the Chinese economy in a positive manner
as well as lower the current high levels of atmospheric pollution. Proven integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) technologies
in new production methods and applications can provide China with its rising energy needs and reduce the SOX, NOX and particu-
lates in the atmosphere. The results of IGCC can support the Chinese economy as it moves into the future.
2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

Keywords: Coal; Gasification; Clean production; Markets; Economy; Business

1. General background capitalism. Investment markets are to become more

China is the worlds largest producer and user of coal.
Due to the greater than 10% economic growth during
the 1980s and 1990s the Chinese demand for coal grew
to exceed 1.2 billion tons per year. With the economic
slow down in Asia since the late 1990s, the economic
growth in China has been reduced to 57% per year from
its 8% over the prior 5 yr. In the energy sector and coal
in particular, this slow down in GDP has resulted in a
200 million ton per year decrease in coal use since 1999.
With the advent of membership to the World Trade
Organization in 2002, few can really predict the
unknown and what is going to happen economically in
China.
There are predictions of continued growth and of
economic slow down as a result of many Chinese busi-
ness, that are not competitive ending operations and sub-
sidies ending for many industries [2]. China has
embarked on restructuring the financial and banking
industry under its 5 yr plan [8] and the concept of social
Corresponding author. Tel.: +852-2310-1951; fax: +852-2310-
1955.
E-mail address: glissad@aol.com (T. Attwood).
open to private participation, however, either with
government regulation or direct government investment
and partnership [12].
All of these changes will be dramatic and the impact
is just uncertain. In addition to the uncertainties of the
economic future there is also the importance of political
stability. All three of Chinas top leaders will be turning
over power in the next 2 yr to the next generation who
are often educated in the west. If younger leaders, with
a more western view to economics, come to power, the
long-term outlook maybe good for bringing some con-
cepts of capitalism into synergy with socialism. But there
may be an unsettling near-term impact of increased
unemployment that could lead to political instability and
economic slow down.
2. Coal resources and use
Coal supplies 75% of Chinas energy demand and
95% of Chinas thermal electric power generation. The
State Power Corporation (SPC) of China has predicted
coal will continue to provide over 60% of the electrical
power needs of China well past 2050. A reduction in
coal as a percentage of power production is predicted to

0959-6526/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

doi:10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00068-9
474 T. Attwood et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003) 473479
come from the increased use of nuclear power. However
in absolute terms coal use is projected to double over the
next 20 yr in terms of the fuel for power generation [9].
China has the worlds third largest coal resources.
According to the China Coal Industry Yearbook 1996
[3], estimates for coal resources are 5500 billion tons,
although much of these resources are probably not
recoverable. China has about 11% of the worlds recov-
erable reserves with 115 billion tons, with 55% classified
as bituminous (including anthracite), 29% as sub-bitum-
inous and 16% lignite [4]. Over 80% of Chinas coal
reserves are concentrated in the north and northwest in
the country.
The average sulfur content of the coal is 1.1% and
ash content of 17%. What this shows is that China has
diverse coal resources just as does the US. In the US
the ratio of anthracite and bituminous to sub-bituminous
and lignite is 0.85 and in China this ratio is 1.2. Gener-
ally the coals in the US have a higher sulfur content and
lower ash content than those of China. These factors will
not really influence the selection of gasification tech-
nology. The diversity of gasification technologies selec-
ted by the US Departmant of Energy [10], for example,
for demonstration and ultimate application in the US
markets will also be the technologies most applicable to
the future Chinese market.
Coal use in China can be delineated as:
Coal use for power generation: 39%.
Coal use for coking: 15%.
Coal use for residential: 10%.
Rail transportation: 1%.
Chemical, cement, ceramics etc.: 35%.
However, the use of coal in China is very different
than that in the US. Over 85% of the coal used in the US
is for the generation of power. This significant difference
alone is a very important aspect that can make gasifi-
cation a more attractive and near term technology option
in China than in the US. In China coal is the most
important energy resource and it is a resource for all
sectors of society except transportation. The transpor-
tation sector will be increasing (how rapidly, will depend
on the business and technology issues identified at the
beginning of this paper) as the economy grows. An
important result for Chinas shift from the use of coal
for energy production has been that the country is
experiencing changes in its oil demand-going from an
exporter of oil to an oil importer over the past 10 yr.
The economic (as well as political) consequences of this
shift have been significant.
3. Technology description of coal gasification
Coal gasification is a technology, which converts coal
into gas. Known as integrated gasification combined
cycle (IGCC), this technology requires high tempera-
tures. Coal, steam and oxygen (or air) are reacted
together to produce a gas containing Hydrogen, carbon
monoxide, carbon dioxide, methane and other com-
pounds. This gas is cleaned to remove particulates and
sulfur compounds. As by-products sulfur or sulfuric acid
can be produced. Gasification technologies can use all
types of coals. It can be linked with combined cycles
(integrated combined cycle) to produce power efficiently
or it can be used as a source of synthesis gas for chemi-
cals or fuel gas for homes and industry. The technology
can produce power at efficiencies of up to 46% and can
remove 99.9% of the sulfur emissions, 90% of the nitro-
gen emissions and 99.99% of particulate emissions. It
is the cleanest technology for producing useful energy
from coal.
4. Impacts on coal use in China
In addition to the uncertain economic growth in China
and much of the world at this time, there are other factors
that will be impacting coal use and the potential for gasi-
fication technology. The more important impacts maybe,
competitiveness, transportation and environmental per-
formance.
4.1. Competitiveness
Competitiveness is important to the application of coal
gasification. As was shown in the discussion before, coal
has an important role in all energy aspects of Chinese
life. The recent paper by Xianqiang [11], which was
presented at the joint US China meeting in Beijing Sep-
tember 2001, presents an excellent argument for the use
of natural gas to replace coal. The paper shows as an
example, the cost of coal to be approximately Rmb
0.04/1000 kcal and natural gas ranging in price from
Rmb 0.170.212/1000 kcal. Though this places gas at
45 times the cost of coal, the paper goes on to make
the case of the long-term economic and environmental
benefits out weigh the cost of the fuel.
Energy efficiency can be greatly improved when using
gas instead of coal. For example the energy use can be
reduced by 50% for both the chemical industry and the
residential use. This will offset the increased cost of gas
and contribute to a tremendous reduction in pollutants.
For example the paper summarizes a study done in
Chongqing to replace residential and small boilers coal
use with gas [1]. The result was that Chongqing would
become in compliance for air emissions under World
Health Organization standards [5].
What Atwood and Fung [1] and other studies do is,
confirm the current policies of China that set as a priority
the direct use of natural gas to residential markets,
chemical industry raw material and finally as a thermal
 T. Attwood et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003) 473479
plant fuel. Many papers presented at an International
meeting held in Beijing in September 2001, for example,
made the point that there is more gas in China than orig-
inally thought just a few years ago. In fact, the State
Development and Planning Commission (SDPC) pre-
dicts more gas supplies than are needed to meet the
demands of the Chinese chemical industry and there will
be enough available for the increasing residential mar-
ket [9].
This will be a very important factor towards the devel-
opment of coal gasification projects in China. The driv-
ing force for coal gasification will be the need for gas
more so than the need for power. There are many
options, beside gasification, to produce power more
efficiently and cleanly than are in current practice in
China. However if the natural gas is not available there
is the need for gasification to supply gas. As China
develops more of its gas resources and builds more pipe-
lines the need for coal gasification diminishes.
4.2. Geographic miss-match
Geographic miss-match of coal users with coal sup-
pliers has lead to a policy of larger coal power plants at
the mine site and transferring power by wire. The Chi-
nese coal industry is located in the central-north, eastern-
north and west, which are great distances from the users
in the east and south of China. The answer seems
straightforward to locate power plants at the mining
sites. However therein lies a new problem of the water
needs. Water is in sort supply in these regions. Generally
an IGCC plant may use as much as 30% less water than
a conventional power plant design. This would be an
advantage for IGCC.
4.3. Transportation bottlenecks
Transportation bottlenecks have caused many prob-
lems with getting the coal to the users. Coal accounts
for the largest percentage of freight of any commodity
in China. The transportation system has not been able
to handle the coal shipping requirements. This has lead
to stockpiles at the mines. In the past it has not been a
coal production, but a coal transportation problem that
has lead to some power plants to look to the international
markets for coal supply. With the economic slowdown
and the possibility of a sluggish worldwide economy this
may provide the window to improve the rail system. The
problem may then be where to obtain the capital to do
the expansion. There are some estimates of $100 billion
per year of investment required to improve the rail trans-
portation system.
4.4. Restructuring
Restructuring of the coal industry has the impact of
the government plans to shut down 25,000 small mines
475
that are very poorly operated and extremely inefficient.
With the drop in coal demand these closures may not
have as negative impact as would have been the case in
the economy growing at its prior rate. But this has the
near term impact of throwing a million people out of
work or reducing the incomes of the farmers that mine
part time.
4.5. Coal pricing practices
Coal pricing practices have lead to the bankruptcy of
the coal industry. Since 1992 the coal industry has run
at a deficit. The pricing of coal has not reflected the
actual cost of production.
4.6. Environmental policies
Environmental policies of the Chinese government
would encourage the use of gasification technologies but
these policies would also encourage the use of the other
competing technologies. In fact in some regards the poli-
cies may inadvertently encourage the use of technologies
other than gasification. China has banded the use of coal
with higher than 3% sulfur content and requires sulfur
control systems on new projects using coal with a sulfur
content greater than 1%.
China has been working over the past decade to
reduce particulate emissions. This has lead to control
systems being placed on 60% of the power plants and a
target of 80% of the plants. While this policy encourages
the use of pollution control systems, the goal can be ach-
ieved through means other than IGCC. In fact the pre-
vention of the use of higher sulfur coals negatively
impacts the use of IGCC. Nevertheless IGCC has the
most superior performance and if there is no economic
reward for exceeding the Chinese limits of environment
performance it is difficult to achieve economic benefits
of gasification.
5. Electrical power generation needs
Prior to the slow down in economic growth China was
adding power generation at the rate of 17 GW per year.
In 1998 the Chinese government placed a halt on new
thermal generation facilities [10]. Since there were over
70 GW of projects in development and construction
when the moratorium was put in place new power plants
have continued to come online. At the same time China
has been retiring the older smaller inefficient local power
facilities. The moratorium is to remain in place through
January 2002. With the growing world economic slow-
down China may be extending this date. At the present
the USEIA projects an average 5% growth in power gen-
eration each year through 2020.
The plans of the SPC include demonstration projects
476 T. Attwood et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003) 473479
for both IGCC and PFB. The SPC has already developed
large CFB and super critical projects. The SPC has been
working on the development of a 200400 MW IGCC
demonstration project. At the current rate of develop-
ment of this project and based on the learning experience
of the similar projects in the US, China would not be in
the position to commercially deploy IGCC technology
till after 2010. This is only if the economic drivers for
the technology are in place.
6. Mixed use applications
One of the main advantages of gasification over com-
bustion is the ability to make a slate of products. Gasifi-
cation can produce fuel gas with a wide range of heating
values and this gas can be put to use in the residential
and industrial markets. The major problem with the resi-
dential market is the tremendous investment required for
the pipeline transportation and distribution system.
Industrial gas applications would not have as demanding
investment requirements if the industry is located in an
area near the gas plant. The other industrial application
is the production of synthesis gas to produce chemicals.
The agricultural and farming sectors are particular sig-
nificant areas for the use of synthesis gas as well as ferti-
lizer derived from coal [8].
The issues related to these applications are as follows.
Chemical synthesis gas production has been the pri-
mary application of gasification in China. Luxian [6]
notes that there are over 1400 fertilizer plants in China.
Over 60% of these plants are small scale (40,000 tons
per year of fertilizer) 30% are mid scale (40,000
100,000 tons per year) and 10% are large scale
(100,000). To put this in perspective in the US there
are 50 fertilizer plants and a mid-scale is about one
million tons per year. Over 65% of the fertilizer plants
in China use coal. The technology is old and very inef-
ficient. China uses about twice the energy as the west to
produce a ton of ammonia.
Texaco has successfully licensed 11 projects to use its
gasifier to produce synthesis gas. Shell has been
developing a project in China using its gasification tech-
nology for synthesis gas. These are very limited projects
in the total scheme of things. What has been more active
has been the construction of world class million tons per
year, fertilizer projects such as in Hynan Island using
natural gas. This will be the ultimate objective and plan
of China to replace the small, old and inefficient fertil-
izer plants with larger natural gas based and efficient
plants. This will probable take a 20-yr period.There
maybe limited potential in regions that lack the transpor-
tation, for improvement of the existing fertilizer plants
using new gasification technology. These will be limited
and will require much in the way of groundwork by the
foreign technology owner to identify those opportunities.
Another problem is that the fertilizer industry needs to
restructure its product mix [7]. Over 90% of the fertilizer
produced is monofertilizer. In the US and Europe, over
80% of the fertilizer used, is compound fertilizer. China
has set a priority to convert its fertilizer production. This
conversion will require an investment $30 million for
the mid-scale facility. Based on studies conducted by
Shanghai Coke and Chemical, the replacement of the
existing Chinese gasification technology with Texaco or
Ugas gasification technology, the investment would be
approximately $30 million for a mid-scale facility.
Hence China has competing demands for funds of
investing to improve efficiency or investing to make a
better product. These investments would be in a site with
a limited future of less than 1020 yr. As was already
discussed before in this report, the SPC is reporting that
China has more natural gas than will be needed for
chemical production. Enron has been developing a large
mixed-use gasification project in Nanjing. What has lead
to this is the project would be dedicated to a large new
chemical complex with joint foreign and Chinese owner-
ship. This would overcome the issues of non-payment
that other foreign projects are experiencing in the
power sector.
The other aspect is that the gas lines are not in place
now and if they ever do come into existence the plant
can be converted from coal to gas. The other important
aspects of this project are that it is a new facility and it
is very large in scale. These factors make this project
more attractive as an opportunity for gasification than
the conversion or retrofitting existing facilities.
Fuel gas industrial applications apply to the industries
that are using gasifiers in China, which include steel,
paper, ceramic, and cement. Though these industries
have old and inefficient technology they do not have the
money to invest in new technology. With the major
changes taking place and the removal of subsidies under
the WTO, there will be many industries that will shut
down or be restructured. Until this business shake out
period has taken place it will be very difficult to predict
the winners and users. Until there is a better understand-
ing of this, there will be a withholding of both the
government and foreign investment in capital improve-
ments. This will require significant time and consider-
able investment in relationship building, in operation of
offices in China and most importantly (and the most dif-
ficult of all) obtain the accurate data and information.
The financial condition of the companies will be
extremely difficult to determine as well as the real mar-
ket and the transportation plans that will impact the
industry.
Residential gas applications are a priority of Chinese
government. This is seen by the many gas pipelines
opening up and the others under development to bring
both Chinese and Russian gas to the eastern cities of
China to reduce pollution. The Chinese government is
 T. Attwood et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003) 473479
projecting that there are sufficient resources to bring gas
to the urban areas. There may be the need for conversion
of coal to medium Btu gas for cities in the coal produc-
ing regions. However large cities in Shanxi Province
(largest coal producing region in China) have shut down
operation of the coal to gas plants and switched to natu-
ral gas. It appears the long-term plan is to bring in natu-
ral gas rather than build large coal to gas plants. Again
there maybe some opportunities in areas where natural
gas may not be practical and coal could be an option.
This would require a very in-depth analysis and
obtaining information that has to date been difficult.
7. Technical readiness
As was discussed the coal resources in China are as
diverse as in the US with large resources of all types of
coals. There are generally no properties that are unique
to Chinese coals and would cause problem with the oper-
ation of coal gasification technologies. As was discussed,
on average, the Chinese coals have less sulfur than the
US coals and a little higher ash content. What are most
important are the specific properties of the coals to be
used for the planned application. Chinese coals have
been tested in Texaco, Shell, Ugas and Lurgi test facili-
ties. The same variety of gasifiers that would apply to
the US market will also apply to the Chinese market.
The US government has invested public funds to dem-
onstrate Lurgi, Texaco, Destec (now called E-gas), KRW
and BGL technology. This represents fixed bed, fluid bed
and entrained flow technologies. In addition to these
technologies there is the HTW fluid bed gasification
technology offered by a German supplier, which has
been in commercial operation for over 10 yr. Other tech-
nologies are the Krupp Koppers technologies (which are
no longer offered for sale) and the Lurgi fluid bed and
entrained flow gasifiers that have not achieved the simi-
lar levels of commercial performance.
The Lurgi fluid bed has been used in smaller scale
commercial projects using wood as a feedstock. The
Gasification Association has conducted world wide sur-
veys showing the only technologies that are planing to
be built, exclusive of demonstration projects are the
Shell and Texaco technologies. There has been little
activity with the Destec technology that was purchased
a few years ago by global energy. The technologies with
the capability to perform in a commercial environment
and having owners that provide the necessary support
services and possible investment include:
1. Lurgi fixed bed (no new projects are planned in the
world);
2. Texaco entrained flow gasifier;
3. Shell entrained gasifier;
4. E-gas now offered by global energy;
477
5. HTW fluid bed gasifier.
Both Texaco and Shell have pursed the development
of synthesis gas projects in China. Texaco has signed 11
license agreements of which six were actually built. Both
companies have been working closely with the SPC on
the development of the IGCC demonstration project.
8. Economics of gasification in China
First it may be best to address the economics of coal
gasification from what we know, the US demonstration
projects. These projects have a capital cost of $1600
$1700/kw. The technology vendors project costs of
future projects to be around $1200/kw. In comparison
GE indicates the cost of coal fired power plants (500
MW) with the necessary pollution control systems to be
in the range of $800$900/kw and natural gas to be
about $600/kw with close to being 60% efficient. The
costs reported by the Chinese are $600$700 for coal
fired power plants with particulate controls but no other
controls. Texaco conducted a feasibility study for a 400
MW IGCC project and developed a cost of $1000/kw
however, not including the cost of financing during con-
struction.
The SPC [9] did not believe this estimate to be
realistic and though it should be closer to $1200/kw.
Based on capital cost there would need to be a 2025%
reduction in capital cost to be competitive with coal
technology with control systems for nitrogen oxides, sul-
fur dioxide and particulates. The coal combustion tech-
nologies that are available today can achieve efficiencies
in the low 40s which is comparable with the IGCC used
in these cost estimates. If the more efficient IGCC tech-
nology were to be used this would add about $150/kw
according to the Texaco study for China. Since the
efficiencies for these cost comparisons are about the
same there really would be little in the way of operating
cost benefit for IGCC.
Since the environmental performance requirements of
China can be obtained with scrubbers and there is no
economic benefit for better performance, the superior
performance of IGCC is not rewarded economically.
This is why all the power generation (e.g. IGCC) using
coals in the world exist with government subsidies. The
way to overcome these economics is to use gasification
where other technologies are not suited, as in the pro-
duction of synthesis gas from low value feedstocks such
as refinery reside and pet coke.
These are very site specific situations that are sought
out through the world from the vast network that Texaco
and Shell both have in the petroleum industry. This is
born out when reviewing the Gasification Database and
World Market Report (2000) [9] developed by the US
DOE with SFA Pacific as consultants. When reviewing
478 T. Attwood et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003) 473479
all the recent gasification projects it is found that the
ones operating with coal and producing power are those
subsidized by the US government or the EU. Those are
also the plans of China under its version of social capi-
talism for its demonstration IGCC project.
The economics for the production of synthesis gas are
different in that if the natural gas is not available, gasifi-
cation is really the only option for the production of syn-
thesis gas from materials containing carbon. Conducting
an economic comparison of the production of synthesis
gas from either coal or refinery waste with the cost of
steam reforming natural gas is a very site-specific evalu-
ation. Generally the drivers for the gasification projects
in the world to convert the refinery waste to gas have
been the need to dispose of the waste and the ability to
use lower cost crude.
9. Business issues
As has been described, the SPC is developing a dem-
onstration project for IGCC and would not move ahead
with building IGCC projects until the demonstration pro-
ject is operated and evaluated. A private foreign devel-
oper could certainly move ahead with IGCC as a tech-
nology option for a power facility in China. The problem
now of course is the hold on power plants, but even of
greater concern is the fact that local regions in China
have not been honoring the electricity tariffs agreed upon
for the existing independent power plants. Until the
WTO impacts are better understood and world economic
outlook has improved it would be very risky to pursue
independent power projects in China.
10. Summary
China is a coal dependent economy and will remain
so for a long time. It has coals similar in quality and
cost to the US. Unlike the US, coal is also the source
of energy for all the sectors other than transportation.
This opens more economic opportunities for coal gasifi-
cation than in the US. However like the US, the option
for these other opportunities is gas and with increasing
finds of natural gas resources and improved efficiencies
these non-power sector applications may be diminishing
over time.
China is a big country like the US and due to geogra-
phy and other issues there may be the need to continue
to use coal in some locations for applications other than
for power and steam. These opportunities can only be
identified through detailed study and groundwork. Both
Texaco, since early 2002, part of Chevron and also Shell
are involved in doing just that in China. Both companies
see the future economic benefits and have the network
as well as the resources to identify the opportunities for
gasification and to pursue such opportunities. Other
international companies are following the lead with tar-
geted markets.
Appendix A
Current potential applications of clean coal industry
production in China
March 9, 2000, Nongmin Ribao (Farmers Daily)
details four main disadvantages Chinas chemical fertil-
izer industry faces compared with that of developed
countries:
1. high-concentration chemical fertilizers account for a
very low proportion;
2. the compound rate of chemical fertilizers is too low;
3. the application intensity of chemical fertilizers is
much too low;
4. chemical fertilizer producers are too dispersed and
small in scale.
July 17, 1999, Zhongguo Huagong Bao (China
Chemical News)Solutions For Chinas Agricultural
Chemicalsby Mr W. Luxian, Chairman of the China
Agricultural Chemicals Industry Association
1. China must bring the industry into balance and pro-
duce more herbicides and fungicides while decreasing
pesticides, especially the toxic kind.
2. China agricultural chemicals industry is 2030 yr
behind the more advanced countries in technology.
Thus, more research and a more forward looking
approach is necessary. Profitability in the industry
through better management techniques could lead to
improve chances for research funding.
3. Not only do most fertilizer facilities need to change
the products they produce, their qualities must also
be enlarged to fit the economy of scale.
4. There is the problem that China is importing many
important agricultural chemicals. This is not only
costly in terms of foreign exchange but damaging in
that it inhibits the growth of Chinas own technologi-
cal research. The Government should seek to establish
Chinas own source of raw materials and bases for
mid-level manufacturing.
December 20, 1999 The Price Department of the State
Development Planning Commission published a notice
on current prices that analyzed the state of Chinas
nitrogenous-fertilizer industry.
The notice said effective measures to end vicious and
low price competition are required for domestic
nitrogenous-fertilizer manufacturers to overcome their
difficult price conditions and to strengthen themselves.
 T. Attwood et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003) 473479
One of the findings that aligns with Atwood and Fung,
2001 paper [1] on fertilizer.
The supply of nitrogenous fertilizers was on the high
side, while demand is low. Therefore, the output of
chemical fertilizers should be controlled so as to
maintain the balance between supply and demand.
References
[1] Atwood T, Fung V. Improving the sustainability of fertilizer pro-
duction and consumption in the Chongqing municipality China
formulation report. Hong Kong, PRC: Global Green-Life Insti-
tute & Chongqing; February 22, 2000. p. 135.
[2] Chang G. The coming collapse of China. Random House: New
York, 2001.
[3] China coal industry yearbook. Beijing, China: State Development
and Planning Corporation; 1996.
[4] Chinese coal prospects to 2010, Internal Energy Agency (IEA).
Paris, France: Coal Research Division; June 1994.
[5] Chongqing Chemical Bureau, 1997.
[6] Luxian W. Solutions for Chinas agricultural chemicals. Zhong-
guo Huagong Bao, China Chemical News; July 17, 1999.
479
[7] Ribao Nongmin. Farmers Daily, Nongrim; March 9, 2000.
[8] Fertilizer in the agriculture sector. Peoples Republic of China,
Ministry of Agriculture Report; 1999.
[9] State Development Planning Commission (SDPC). The price
department; December 20, 1999.
[10] US Department of Energy. Energy Information Agency (USEIA).
Data, web site; 1998.
[11] Xianqiang M, Xiurui G. Improving quality in large Chinese sub-
stituting natural gas for coal. Beijing, China: International Con-
ference on Coal; 1999.
[12] Xing L, Clark WW. Social capitalism. Int J Technol Trans Com-
merc; London, UK: Inderscience Press, paper to be published
in 2002.
Ted Atwood received his PhD in Chemical Engineering from the Univer-
sity of California, Berkeley. Since then he has worked in the private sector
and for the US Department of Energy in clean coal technologies for Asia.
Virginia Fung received her undergraduate and graduate training from the
University of Southern California in public policy. She has focused on new
advanced technologies for environmentally sound business development in
Asia, especially China.
W.W. Clark received his PhD in Anthropology at University of Califor-
nia, Berkeley and works as a qualitative economist on international energy
policy issues.