PHILLIPS HYDROCARBONS Our productive capacity and flexibility allow us to serve you reliably. If you don't see what you require, we may have the facilities and ability to produce it for you. Research
Pure Tech. 99% 95%
"»-'"· ΚΤ&ΐ
PARAFFINS Methane Ethane Propane Isobutane Norma! Butane
OLEFINS Ethylene Propylene Isobutylene Butene-1 trans-Butene-2 cis-Butene-2 Butene-2
2,2-Dimethylpropane Isopentane Normal Pentane 2,2-Dimethylbutane 2,3-Dimethylbutane 2-Methylpentane 3-Methylpentane Normal Hexane
2-Methylbutene-l 3-Methylbutene-l 2-Methylbutene-2 Pentene-1 4-Methylpentene-l cis-4-Methylpentene-2 trans-4-Methylpentene-2 4-Methylpentene-2 2-Methylpentene-l 2-Methylpentene-2 Hexene-1 Heptene-2 2,4,4-Trimethylpentene-l 2,4,4-Trimethylpentene-2 Octene-1 mixed Normal Octenes
2,4-Dimethylpentane Normal Heptane 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane 2,3,4-Trimethylpentane Normal Octane Normal Nonane Normal Decane Norma! Undecane Normal Dodecane Normal Tridecane Normal Tetradecane Normal Pentadecane Normal Hexadecane
CYCLOOLEFINS Cyclopentene Cyclohexene
CYCLOPARAFFINS Cyclopentane Methylcyclopentane Cyclohexane Methycyclohexane
DIOLEFINS Butadiene-1,3
cis-1,2Dimethyicyclohexane trans-1,2Dimethylcyclohexane Isopropylcyclohexane Π =commercial quantities $g ^developmental quantities
AROMATICS Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene ortho-Xylene para-Xylene meta-Xylene 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene Isopropylbenzene n-Propylbenzene Isobutylbenzene sec-Butylbenzene tert-Butylbenzene n-Butylbenzene sec-Amylbenzene
Petrochemical and Supply Division PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY \ Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74004 \ Phone: 806 274-5236
The1 Performance / Company!
16
C&EN Jan. 27, 1975
PHILLIPS
requirements for production facilities alone would total $500 billion to $600 billion. That figure, the task force noted, does not include working capital, divi dends, debt service, or other financial obligations. Nor were government R&D and production facilities such as the uranium enrichment operations includ ed in the estimate. Administration reckoning on the matter—at least as expressed by Interior Secretary and en ergy chief Rogers C. B. Morton at a Manufacturing Chemists Association luncheon in Washington earlier this month—puts the total investment be tween now and 1985 at $800 billion. Of this amount, he says, about $160 billion would go for electric power systems, $300 billion for oil and natural gas— mostly on the supply side of supplydemand, $150 billion for research to get production beyond 1985, $100 billion for energy-saving devices, $50 billion to protect the environment, and $40 billion to get from here to there with coal. Fred H. Zerkel, C&EN Washington
Nuclear power key to energy crunch Thirty-four scientists—among them 11 nuclear physicists and 11 Nobel Lau reates, including ACS president-elect Glenn T. Seaborg—say that increased use of nuclear power is the only reason able way to meet U.S. long-range ener gy needs. The benefits, they contend, outweigh the risks. Their statement, drawn up and pre sented by Dr. Hans Bethe of Cornell University's laboratory of nuclear stud ies, followed President Ford's State of the Union message in which Ford called for the construction of 200 nu clear power plants by 1985. The scien tists say that contrary to the scare pub licity given to some mistakes that have occurred, no "appreciable" amount of radioactive material has escaped from any commercial U.S. power reactor. Also, they express confidence that technical ingenuity and care in opera tion will continue to improve the safety in all phases of the nuclear power.pro gram, including transportation and disposal of nuclear wastes. Coal, offshore oil exploration, and "strong measures"' to stimulate the discovery of natural gas are some of the other long-range options the scientists list. However, the scientists do not ex plain what they mean by "strong mea sures." In the near term, they see con servation as the only energy option. The scientists say they do not intend to downplay alternative energy sources such as solar, geothermal, fusion, and wind. But they feel that these sources, still in the laboratory stage, are unlike ly to contribute "significantly" to the U.S. energy picture. They cite the case of nuclear power, which although dem onstrated to be feasible in 1942, did not come of age until 1962. And it was
1974 before nuclear power made any sort of "significant" contribution to U.S. energy. The scientists call for continued vigorous research in these areas nevertheless. Ralph Nader's Union of Concerned Scientists, a group studying the pros and cons of nuclear power, immediate ly criticized the scientists' statement. The group says that safety problems associated with nuclear power use have yet to be resolved. D
Enough water for 1985 energy needs Contrary to policymakers' concerns that there won't be enough water for a massive development of U.S. energy resources by 1985, a staff report by the Senate Committee on Interior and In sular Affairs says that, with the right kind of planning, adequate water supplies do exist. Water is required for power plant cooling, gasification and liquefaction of coal, converting oil shale to liquid fuel, and reclamation of mined arid lands. Indeed, the report, prepared at the request of committee chairman Henry M. Jackson (D.-Wash.), says that in gross terms, the development of water resources for energy production in 1985 is "well within the bounds of feasibili ty." It notes that total U.S. require ments for water for energy production on a scale that would reduce U.S. vul nerability to foreign oil embargoes would be about 11.2 million acre-feet per year. This amount represents 11% of 1970 water consumption, according to the National Water Commission. Development of energy in the Colo rado River Basin (Colorado, New Mex ico, Utah, California, Wyoming, Arizo na, and Nevada) would require about 1.06 million acre-feet per year of water in 1985. For the Northern Great Plains (Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota), it would take about 700,000 acre-feet. The report points out that most untapped domes tic energy resources lie in these re gions. For instance, it estimates that the Colorado River Basin contains more than 100 billion tons of coal. Fur ther, it says that the basin includes "substantially all" of the U.S. reserves of oil shale from which more than 100 billion bbl of oil might be "economical ly recoverable." The report also esti mates that the Northern Great Plains contain 1.5 trillion tons (or 40%) of U.S. coal reserves, of which 35 billion tons are "readily surface-minable." The report points out that the cur rent water shortage problem in the Colorado River Basin region is "pro spective" rather than real, that it is a problem of legal constraints rather than one of physical limitation. About 90% of existing water supplies are com mitted to agriculture, much of it "inef ficiently applied and producing low-
PHILLIPS PETRO-SULFUR COMPOUNDS As a leading supplier of petro-sulfur compounds, Phillips consistently provides the highest quality products while continuing research to meet special needs. Typical
DISULFIDES
Puntv
MERCAPTANS (THIOLS) wt. % •Ethyl Mercaptan 99+ *iso-Propyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Propyl Mercaptan 99+ iso-Butyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Butyl Mercaptan 98 sec-Butyl Mercaptan 97 •tert-Butyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Hexyl Mercaptan 96 . oo 4 Λ , , .. *n-0cty Mercaptan 98 *A \ η * . M * oc *tert-Octyl Mercaptans 96 . . Μ ι κ« * Ω7 tert-Nonyl Mercaptans 97 η ι M * oc n-Decyl Mercaptan 95 *n-Dodecyl Mercaptan 92 *tert-Dodecyl Mercaptans 97 *tert-Tetradecyl Mercaptans 94 *tert-Hexadecyl Mercaptans 82 •Mixed Tertiary Mercaptans 94-98 Cyclohexyl Mercaptan 99 + SULFIDES Methyl Sulfide 99 •Ethyl Sulfide 96-99 η-Propyl Sulfide 96 tert-Butyl Sulfide 97 *n-Butyl Sulfide 97
*tert-Butyl Disulfide tert-Dodecyl Disulfide p 0 L Y S U L F | D E S P 0 L
, „ ,* tert-Butyl Polysulf.de
c y c u c
S U L F 0 N E S
AU
3-Methylsulfolane , . . i U , .. . 3-Methylsulfolene / *Sufoane *Sulfolene
MISCELLANEOUS Ethylenetrithiocarbonate *Ethy|thioethanol * 2 . M ercaptoethanol OTHER PETRO-SULFUR COMPOUNDS: If you don't see what you need above, li us know. We'll be happy to discuss yoi specific requirements.
*These Petro-Sulfur Compounds are available in commercial quantities.
Petrochemical and Supply Division PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74004 Phone: 806 274-5236
r F T ^ A Performance | £ ^ J J J Company |
Jan. 27, 1975 C&EN 17
