advanced coal generation technologyenhanced oil recovery sng to pipeline gasification & heat...

Advanced Coal Generation Technology

National Conference of State Legislatures Coal WorkshopNovember 20, 2008

Dr. Jeffrey N. PhillipsSenior Program ManagerAdvanced Generation Options

2© 2008 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

Kaya Identity

• Japanese energy economist Yoichi Kaya has shown that human-based CO2 emissions from a country is directly proportional to:– The total number of humans in that country– The standard of living (per capita GDP)– The energy intensity of that economy (how much GDP

per kilowatt of energy consumed)– And the “carbon intensity” of the energy used in that

economy (CO2 produced per kilowatt of energy consumed)

In theory, you could decrease CO2 emission by decreasing any of these four items – which would you choose?


Options from Decreasing Human-Based CO2Emissions

• Decrease population (P): doubtful• Decrease standard of living (GDP/P): NO!• Decrease energy intensity (E/GDP): possible via higher

efficiency processes• Decrease carbon intensity: use low CO2 emission power

sources (e.g., renewables, nuclear and coal with CO2capture and storage)

Let’s focus on the last two bullet points!!!


Conventional Coal Plant

100 MW

12 MW

88 MW

41.5 MW

46.5 MW

39 % Efficiency (HHV basis)

2.5 MW own use

39 MW


History of Steam Conditions forFossil Fired Power Plants

45 Years of No Progress!!!


A Different Story for Gas Turbines!(Note: Pentagon has funded R&D for jet engines for many years)

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year

Max

. Tur

bine

Inle

t Tem

p. (D

eg F

)Gas Turbines Steam Turbines


• Previously in the USA, the cost benefits of increased generatingefficiency did not justify the increased capital cost

– Increasing fuel costs changing this view– Over 7,300 MW of SC PC capacity under construction in

USA; some use ferritic steels for main steam up to 593°C (1100°F)

• The loss of net power and increased cost of electricity associated with CO2 capture also favors higher efficiency

– Reducing CO2/MWh reduces cost of capture and storage• High-nickel alloys for ultra-supercritical (USC) steam conditions

being developed– AD700 in Europe for 700°C (1290°F) and U.S. Dept. of

Energy (DOE) for 760°C (1400°F)

Increased Efficiency Lowers Cost of CO2 Capture


When CO2 Capture Included, Higher PC Efficiency Lowers Levelized Cost-of-Electricity

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

30 35 40 45 50

Efficiency of PC plant without CO2 capture, % (HHV)

Rel

ativ

e C

OE,

-

Pittsburg #8 PRB

Based on KS-1 solvent, but oxy-combustion consider similar

Potential range of COE increase with improvements in CCS technology either post-combustion capture or oxycombustion

Capture only. No allowance for transportation and storage.


Relative $/kW Total Plant Cost (2005 = 100%) Plant Net Efficiency (HHV Basis)

USC PC RD&D Augmentation Plan—Expected Benefits Case:Pittsburgh #8 coal, 90% availability, 90% CO2 capture

110

100

90

80

70

602005 2010 2015 2020 2025

40

38

36

34

32

30

Near Mid-Term:• Upgrade steam

conditions to 4200/1110/1150

Mid-Term:• Upgrade steam

conditions to 5000/1300/1300, and then to 5000/1400/1400/1400

Near-Term:• Upgrade solvent from MEA

to MHI KS-1 (or equivalent)• Upgrade steam conditions

from 3500/1050/1050 to 3615/1100/1100

Long-Term:• Upgrade solvent

to ammonium bicarbonate (or equivalent)


Gas Turbine “simple cycle”

100 MW

35 MW

65 MW

35% Efficiency (HHV basis)


Combined Cycle

100 MW

Fuel

35 MW17 MW

65 MW

27 MW

21 MW to condenser

38 MW

17 + 35 = 52 MW 52% Efficiency! (burning natural gas)


15MW 79MW

28MW51MW

47MW20MW

9MW

Net Coal to Power: 28 + 20 – 9 = 39% (HHV basis)

19MW

100MW

IGCC schematic from US DOE27 MW


Dakota Gasification Pre-Combustion Capture in Commercial-Scale Operation

CO2 to Enhanced Oil

Recovery

SNG to pipeline

Gasification & Heat Recovery

CO2Production &

RemovalMethanation

“Syngas”

H2-rich syngas

CO2 Pipeline

Supplies natural gas power plants (approx 1000 MW)

connected to NG pipeline gridOwned by Dakota

Gasification

Lignite


IGCC Long-Term RD&D Plan—Expected BenefitsCase: Slurry-fed gasifier, U.S. bituminous coal, 90% availability, 90% CO2 capture

60

70

80

90

100

110

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Long-Term• Membrane

separation• Warm gas

cleanup• CO2-coal slurry

Rel

ativ

e Pl

ant C

ost (

$/kW

, 200

5 =

100%

)

30

32

34

36

38

40

Plan

t Net

Effi

cien

cy (H

HV

Bas

is)Mid-Term

• Ion transfer membrane oxygen• G-class to H-class gas turbines• Supercritical HRSG• Dry ultra-low-NOX combustors

Longest-Term• Fuel cell

hybrids

Near-Term • Add SCR• Eliminate spare gasifier • F-class to G-class gas

turbines• Improved Hg detection


Conclusions

• CO2 emissions caused by humans could be decreased by increasing the efficiency of coal-based power plants as well as by capturing CO2 from those plants

• EPRI and others have identified R&D pathways that could lead to significant improvements in coal power plant thermal efficiency– This is true for both combustion-based and

gasification-based coal power plants


Background info


+45%

Both Scenarios meet the same economy-wide CO2 Cap*Both Scenarios meet the same economy-wide CO2 Cap*

*Economy-wide CO2 emissions capped at 2010 levels until 2020 and then reduced at 3%/yr

Increase in Real Electricity Prices…2000 to 2050

+260%

advanced coal generation technologyenhanced oil recovery sng to pipeline gasification & heat...

Documents