FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGenA Global Leadership Project
November 19, 2009
1
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen
Commercial-scale, Leading Edge
• 275-Mwe (nominal) IGCC Power Plant
• >1 million metric tons/year CO2captured
• Storage in deep saline geologic formation
• Near-zero NOx, SOx, and PM emissions• Advanced technology design to prove integrated operations and lead
the way to affordable, low-carbon coal power• Design and architecture is compatible with community and will be a
prototype for ease of siting• Stakeholder involvement to build technology support
2
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen
The Global Leadership Project
• Government drivers:
– Need a bold technology response to climate change and energy concerns
– Need to broadly engage industry and governments on a global basis to position for subsequent commercial deployment of the technology globally
– Need to validate the cost and performance of an IGCC-based coal-fueled power plant with near-zero emissions, including carbon capture and sequestration in a saline formation
• FutureGen addresses these needs
“FutureGen reflects [the Obama] Administration's commitment to rapidly developing carbon capture and sequestration technology”
Secretary of Energy ChuJune 12, 2009
“FutureGen reflects [the Obama] Administration's commitment to rapidly developing carbon capture and sequestration technology”
Secretary of Energy ChuJune 12, 2009
3
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen
Value Proposition for Industrial Members
• Increase recognition as global leader– With shareholders, viewed as responsive to financial and environmental
concerns related to climate change– With governments, viewed as supportive of government efforts to advance
climate/energy technology and collaborate internationally– With the public, perceived as being focused on climate solutions
• Strengthen corporate knowledge of IGCC and CCS technologies– Access to technical details of the engineering design effort – Ability to gain operational experience with the plant– Opportunity to network with the decision makers of member companies and
second employees to the project
• Strategically preserve coal production and coal trading markets, as well as ensure a diversified utility fuel supply
4
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Status
Years Ahead of “Comparable” Projects
• Status– $50 million of technical work completed– Completed site selection process– Completed legal framework to manage CO2 injection liability issues– Completed Environmental Impact Statement – Completed Conceptual design and cost estimate– Nearly complete Preliminary design and cost estimate– Highly supportive local and State community– $1.1 billion in Department of Energy cash
5
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Project Structure
Industrial Members Manage the Project
InternationalIndustrial
Participation
• Non-profit consortium of coal production companies, coal trading companies, and coal-fueled utilities
6
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Project Structure
Project Organizational Structure
InternationalGovernmentParticipation
Cooperative
Agreement(s) InternationalIndustrial
Participation
ProjectManagement
Steering
Group
TechnologySuppliers
EngineeringFirms
ResearchInstitutions
Other Businesses
7
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Schedule
FutureGen is Ahead and Accelerating
2009Obama Administrationrenews DOE support
(sets aside $1.1B)
Jan. 2010Readiness assessment to proceed to
final design, equipment procurement, &site preparation
Early 2011Full Construction
Start
2014On-line
Mid-2009EIS Record of Decision
Mid-2007DOE withdraws
support
Mid-2007 to 2009Industry and
Illinois maintain support without
DOE
DOE – Allianceform partnership
8
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Site Selection
Proposed Sites
12 Sites in 7 States
C. Davidson 20069
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Site RFP
Qualifying Criteria
Geologic Storage
Site Characteristics• Surface Access• Mineral Rights• Water Rights
Subsurface Water • Not drinking standard• Protect for future use
Formation• Depth• Primary Seal• Saline• Stimulation
Capacity• Test / Post-test• Injection rate capable
Proximity to Sensitive Areas• Lakes / Shorelines• Transmissive Faults• Sensitive Features
Permitability
Power Plant
Physical• Location• Size• Control• Seismicity• Flood Plain
Other Site• Existing site hazards• Existing use
Proximity to Sensitive Areas• Airspace• Threatened species• Cultural• Public Access• Class I visibility
Water• Access• Adequacy
Fuel Supply
10
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Site Selection
Scoring Criteria
Power Plant - Site
Physical Characteristics• Size• Topography• Elevation• Flood Plain• Wetland
Other Site Characteristics• Road Access• Proximity to target formation• Critical habitats• Cultural resources• Public sccess areas
Exposure to Hazards• Hurricane• Tornado
Regulatory and Permitting
Power Plant - Const & Ops
Water• Distance• Adequacy
Transmission• Grid proximity• Voltage• Rights of way
Other Site Characteristics• Rail/Barge access• Delivery mode flexibility• Access to gas
Workforce• Constructions• Operations• Construction cost
Geologic Storage
Geologic Characteristics• Target Formations• Orientation• Permeability• Capacity
Seals• Faults• Capillary Entry Pressure• Fracture Gradient• Injection Well Penetrations• Secondary Seals
MMV• Physical Access• Legal Access• Subsurface Access
11 11
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Site Selection
Scoring Criteria
3.0 Power Plant
SiteCharacteristics
Construction &Operations
3.1 PhysicalCharacterisitcs
3.3 Proximity toSensitive Areas
3.4 Exposure toNatural Hazards
3.2 Other SiteCharacteristics
3.1.1Size
3.6 Water(Cooling)
3.7Transmission
3.8 Materialand FuelDelivery
3.2.1Road
Access
3.2.2Proximityto Target.Forma-tion(s)
3.3.2 TES& CriticalHabitat
3.3.3Cultural
Resources
3.3.4PublicAccessAreas
3.3.5 Non-Attainment
/ Maint.Areas
3.3.1Class I
VisibilityAreas
3.6.1Distance
3.6.2Adequacy
3.7.1 GridProximity
3.7.2Voltage
3.8.3Access to
NaturalGas
3.8.2DeliveryMode
Flexibility
3.8.1 Rail/Barge
Access
3.5.1SEPA
3.1.3Ele-
vation
3.7.3Rights-of-way
3.9Availability of
Workforce
3.9.3Construc-tion Cost
3.9.2Opera-tionalLaor
3.9.1Construc-tion Labor
FutureGen Siting Scoring Criteria
3.1.2Topo-graphy
3.2.5Existing
Land Use
3.2.3Dis-
persion
3.2.4 AirQuality
3.4.1Hurricane
3.4.2Tornado
3.1.4Flood-plain
3.5 Regulatory& Permitting
3.1.5Wetlands
4.0 Geologic Storage
Security
4.1 FormationProperties
4.1.2Orien-tation
4.1.4Capacity
4.2.1Faults
4.2.2Capillary
EntryPressure
4.2.4Injection
WellPenetra-
tions
4.2.5Other
Penetra-tions
4.2.3FractureGradient
4.3.1PhysicalAccess
4.1.1TargetForma-tion(s)
GeologicCharacteristics
4.1.5Size
4.1.3 Per-meability
4.2 Seals4.3 Monitoring,Measurement &
Verification
4.2.6Secondary
Seals
4.3.3Subsurface
Access
4.3.2Legal
Access
29 Surface Criteria 14 Subsurface Criteria
12
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Technical Aspects
Mattoon Site – Excellent Infrastructure
13
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Technical Aspects
Mattoon Site – Storage Rights Addressed
14
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Technical Aspects
Saline Formation is Globally Abundant
Thick, homogeneous sandstone
Concentrated Plume Quality Injection Well Design15
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Technical Aspects
Subsurface Research MM&V “Laboratory”
16
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Accomplishments
FutureGen Years Ahead• Final site selected
– World’s first structure siting protocol published
– Local community and state community support is very strong
• FutureGen Environmental Impact Statement Complete– ~2000-page assessment, which
concluded that Mattoon site is environmentally acceptable
– Average DOE coal plant project EIS requires 33- to 36-months, which puts FutureGen far ahead of other recently initiated projects
17
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Technical Aspects
Facility: Advanced Backbone + R&D
Air
User Test Facility
Advanced Gas Clean-Up
SyngasSyngas CO2
Advanced CO2 separation
O2 SyngasSyngas H2CO2Coal
Air
Slag
AirSeparation
UnitGasification Gas Clean-Up
CO2Separation
ElectricityGeneration
CO2Sequestration &
Monitoring
Electricity Generation Backbone with CO2 Sequestration/Monitoring System
Advanced Oxygen
Separation
Other Technologies
Electricity,H2, or
other Products
Advanced Coal
Conversion
POWER
Current Focus
State-of-the-ArtGasificationTechnology
With
Saline Carbon Storage
Future ResearchUser Facility *
* Contingent on additional contributions and ultimate facility ownership issues18
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Accomplishments
FutureGen Years Ahead
• 50-person engineering team established– Conceptual design complete– Preliminary design nearing completion– Major equipment Requests for Information (RFI) complete– Gasification island RFP issued– Other key equipment RFPs drafted and pending release– Underground Injection Control permit (UIC) submitted– Air permit in progress
19
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Accomplishments
FutureGen Years Ahead
• Cost estimating – 2008 capital and operating estimate complete (peak of market)
– Bottoms-up estimate– 380 equipment quotes + factoring– Dozens of binders of documentation
– 2009 refined capital and operating estimate in progress– Prior to value engineering and other refinements expectations for the
project’s costs are approximately:
2010$ As-Spent
Capital 1.7 1.9Operating (4 yrs ops + 2 yrs monitoring)
0.4 0.5
Total $2.1B $2.4B
20
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Current Activities
Accelerating the Pace of Progress
• Work focus through Spring– Continue design and permitting activities– Finalize funding strategy
– Capital strategy– Power purchase framework
– Expand industrial participation– Letters of Intent
Non-DOE (Industry and State of Illinois)
21
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen Difference
Years ahead
• Years ahead of “comparable” projects– Completed site selection process– Completed legal framework to manage CO2 injection liability issues– Completed Environmental Impact Statement – Completed Conceptual design and cost estimate– Fully functional engineering team– Nearly complete Preliminary design and cost estimate– Highly supportive local and State community– Motivated existing Alliance members
FutureGen is years ahead and will provide the learnings to accelerate other CCS projects
22
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen Difference
Technical Differences
Funded & proceeding
Adv. design & waiting approval
Proposed
Legend
Saline-Sedimentary Formations
Sto
rage
For
mat
ion
Abu
ndan
ce
United StatesFG) FutureGen2) Hydrogen Energy 3) Taylorville Hybrid 4) Mississippi Power5) Various6) Duke
Foreign7) ZeroGen (AU)8) GreenGen (CN)9) RWE (DE)10) EPCOR (CA)11) Various (EU)
90% Saline Bit90% EOR Coke/coal
~50% Saline Bit50% EOR Lignite
~60% EOR Various0–18% TBD Bit
~60% TBD Bitslip-stream TBD Coal
~60% Saline Lignite85% EOR Coal
0-90% Offshore
Saline-Basalt FormationsDepleted Gas ReserviorsCoal SeamsEnhanced Oil Recovery
% Capture
23
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen Difference
Technical Differences
10
Funded & proceeding
Adv. design & waiting approval
Proposed
LegendFG
2
3
5
9
68
4
7
Sto
rage
For
mat
ion
Abu
ndan
ce
United StatesFG) FutureGen2) Hydrogen Energy 3) Taylorville Hybrid 4) Mississippi Power5) Various6) Duke
Foreign7) ZeroGen (AU)8) GreenGen (CN)9) RWE (DE)10) EPCOR (CA)11) Various (EU)
90% Saline Bit90% EOR Coke/coal
~50% Saline Bit50% EOR Lignite
~60% EOR Various0–18% TBD Bit
~60% TBD Bitslip-stream TBD Coal
~60% Saline Lignite85% EOR Coal
0-90% Offshore
% Capture
24
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen Difference
Structural Differences
FutureGen atMattoon
TypicalDemonstration
BusinessStructure
Non-Profit For-Profit
Information Sharing High Low
International Participation High Low -> Med
Opportunity forDirected R&D
Medium Low
User Access High Low
25
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
FutureGen Difference
Additional Possibilities
• Contingent upon long-term ownership strategy, which is driven by members and future federal funding, FutureGen provides a test bed for long-term R&D possibilities:– Long-term CO2 injection– Advanced CO2 monitoring and verification systems– Biomass co-firing – Advanced gasifier designs– Membrane technologies (e.g. ITM) for O2 designs and gas clean up– H2 turbine combustor and blade upgrades– Fuel cell/turbine integration studies– Advanced gas clean-up systems
If not at FutureGen, then where and when canthese advancements be achieved?
26
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Funding Strategy
U.S. Government Commitment
The U.S. Department of Energy has $1.073 billion cash-in-hand
for the project
“FutureGen reflects this Administration's commitment to rapidly developing carbon capture and sequestration technology”
Dr. Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy
“FutureGen is a priority”President Obama
“We [DOE] are fully committed and moving without hesitation.” “We are going to get this done.”
Dr. James Markowsky, Assistant Secretary of Energy for Fossil Energy
“The FutureGen project has great potential to be a flagship project in using coal in a way that reduces carbon in the atmosphere”
Dr. Kristina Johnson, Under Secretary of Energy
27
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Domo Arigato Gozaimashita !
28
FutureGen Alliance Confidential Information
Contact Information:
Michael J. MuddChief Executive OfficerFutureGen Industrial [email protected]
Ken HumphreysManaging DirectorFutureGen Industrial [email protected] 521-7784
29