optimisation of coal fired power plant performance when...

© Imperial College London

BCURA PROJECT B70AUGUST 2003 - JANUARY 2005

OPTIMISATION OF COAL FIRED POWER PLANT PERFORMANCE WHEN USING FLUE

GAS SCRUBBERS FOR CO2 CAPTURE

The Coal Research Forum Autumn Meeting 2005The presentation of current projects funded through the BCURA/DTI programme

Wednesday 14th September 2005British Sugar plc. Conference Centre, Holmewood Hall, Peterborough

Jon Gibbins, Bob CraneImperial College London

Des DillonMitsui Babcock Energy Ltd

STEAM FORCO2

RELEASE

GASTO

STACK LEAN/RICHHEAT

EXCHANGER

SCR

UB

BER

STR

IPPE

R

FLUEGAS

COOLER

BLOWER REBOILER

REFLUX CONDENSERS

POWER FORCO2 COMPRESSOR

FWH INTERCOOLER

COOLING WATERINTERCOOLER

BOILERFEED WATER

TO FWH5

COMPRESSEDCO2 FOREXPORT

BOILER FEED WATERFROM CONDENSER

FLUE GAS

FLUE GASFROM

FGD PLANT

CONDENSATE FROM CO2

SOLVENT SOLUTION

CO2

BOILER FEED WATER

COOLING WATER

AMINE CO2 CAPTURE SYSTEM PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM


POST COMBUSTION CAPTURE STATE OF THE ART BEFORE PROJECTLeading options for the capture of CO2 at power stations,

IEA GHG 3/14, February 2000


STEAM EXTRACTION FROM POWER PLANT TURBINEwith poor solvent and no integration can reduce efficiency by >12 percentage points

HPcylinder

IPcylinder LP

cylinderLP

cylinder

Desuperheat with reboiler condensate

Steam offtake valveBack pressure valve to maintain IP exit pressure

Steam toreboiler

Alstom Large Steam Turbines brochure


SIX RULES FORMULATED TO FILTER OUT INAPPROPRIATE POST COMBUSTION LITERATURE AND GUIDE IMPROVED PLANT DESIGN

STUDIES

1. Add heat to the steam cycle at as high a temperature as possible (i.e. be prepared to use best available steam conditions if commercially justified).

2. Reject heat from the steam cycle, in the steam extracted for solvent regeneration, at as low a temperature as possible.

3. Produce as much electricity as possible from any additional fuel used, consistent with rejecting heat at the required temperature for solvent regeneration.

4. Make use of waste heat from CO2 capture and compression in the steam cycle.

5. Use the latest solvent developments.

6. Exploit the inherent flexibility of post-combustion capture.


G

HEAT FORCO2

RELEASE HEAT FROMCOMPRESSOR

INTERCOOLERS

HEAT FROMCO2 REFLUX

CONDENSERS

HEAT INPUT FROM BOILER

HEAT TOCONDENSER

COOLINGWATER

HP IP LP

FWH1FWH5 FWH2FWH3FWH4FWH7 FWH6 DEAERATOR

REBOILER

LPFWH HEAT RECOVERY

LIQUID

VAPOUR

SPRAYDESUPERHEATER

IMPROVED OPTIONS FOR REMOVING STEAM AND RECOVERING ‘WASTE’ ENERGY


BENEFIT OF APPLYING THE RULES TO IEA GHG PH3/14 RESULTSPlant configurationNo capture MEA no

integrationMEA+

HPFWHMEA+

LPFWHMEA+

HPFWH+ LPFWH

KS2 no integration

KS2+ HPFWH

KS2+ LPFWH

KS2+ HPFWH+ LPFWH

LHV efficiency penalty (percentage points)

0.0 12.6 11.9 12.0 11.3 10.3 9.7 9.7 9.1

Extra MW 0.0 0.0 8.2 6.5 6.4 26.0 6.0 6.6 6.5CO2 emitted (tonne/hr) 361.8 53.6 53.6 53.6 53.6 53.6 53.6 53.6 53.6Generation efficiency (%LHV) 45.6 33.0 33.7 33.6 34.3 35.3 35.9 35.9 36.5

Capital cost ($/kW) 1022 1856 1815 1823 1784 1732 1705 1703 1678Capital charges (c/kWh) 1.9 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.1Cost of fuel (c/kWh) 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5Other costs (c/kWh) 0.7 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1

Cost of electricity (c/kWh) 3.7 6.4 6.2 6.2 6.1 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.7

Rule 2Rule 4

Gibbins, Crane, JPE, 2004© Imperial College London Rule 5

POST COMBUSTION AND IGCC COMPARISON


POST COMBUSTION AND OXYFUEL COMPARISON


2005

2010

2015

2020

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

TWh

renewablenuclearhydropowernatural cogenerationnatural gas generationoil

clean coalnew prior coal fired cogenerationnew prior coal generation existing coal fired cogenerationexisting coal generation

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2005

2010

2015

2020

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Mt C

O 2

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

MARKETFORCES

DOMINANT

TECHNICALLYFEASIBLE

DEVELOPMENT

Total UK CO2emissions

Estimates for future Chinese electricity generation and associated CO2 emissions

based on Guo Yuan and Zhou Dadi, Low emission options in China's electric power generation sector,ZETS Conference, Brisbane, Feb 2004.


CCS IN G8 GLENEAGLES COMMUNIQUE


GENERAL PRINCIPLES FOR CAPTURE READY POWER PLANTFundamental requirementsa) Sufficient space on site and in critical access locations to add CO2 capture plant

and necessary internal interconnections.b) Design study for adding CO2 capture, to assess technical feasibility and cost-

effectiveness.c) CO2 storage option(s)

Plus optional pre-investments, depending on economic justification.

Possible pre-investment options for pulverised coal steam plant are:• Build capture ready IGCC (i.e. not just ordinary IGCC) instead of capture ready

pulverised coal steam plant

• For post combustion capture:a) High efficiency (or upgradeable) FGD (if FGD is required)b) Turbine modifications to facilitate steam extraction

• For oxyfuel capture: a) If an FGD is fitted, verify operation under oxyfuel conditionsb) Support tie-ins for heaters and recycle ductsc) Provision for fans to operate under changed flows


PRELIMINARY BREAKDOWN FOR ADDITIONAL COE WITH CAPTURE

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

1 2

Add

ition

al C

OE

(CA

D/M

Wh)

Turbine mismatchO&M ConsumablesCapture capitalEfficiency penalty

~ Fluor ~ MHI

Max Ball, Bob Stobbs, Larry Ward, Jon Gibbins and Malcolm Wilson, A new 'capture ready' power plant project in Saskatchewan, 4th Ann. Conf. on Carbon Seq.,Alexandria VA, May 2-5, 2005.


POSSIBLE BENEFITS FOR MAKING PLANTS CAPTURE READY

Adding capture to: Capture ready Capture un-readyIGCC PC IGCC PC

Original efficiency %LHV 40.0% 42.0% 40.0% 42.0%Efficiency penalty %LHV 6.5% 8.5% 7.5% 9.5%

Additional electricity cost for reduced output 19.4% 25.4% 23.1% 29.2%

Capture plant capital cost ($/kW, % above original) 30.0% 50.0% 45.0% 75.0%Capture plant capital cost as % of original capital cost 10.6% 24.6% 21.9% 45.8%Capture plant capital cost contribution to electricity cost for original fuel cost fraction shown 30% 7.4% 17.2% 15.3% 32.0%

Loss of 1 year production added to next 20 years at 10% discount rate, % of cost/yr 11.7% 8.2% 8.2%Fuel cost fraction (avoided costs) 30%

Total additional electricity cost, based on ORIGINAL cost for THAT technology 26.8% 42.6% 46.6% 69.5%

• Bigger increase in electricity cost to add capture to PC, but initial electricity cost for IGCC probably higher• But this is for current post-combustion capture and IGCC technology –changes possible



Refereed Journal PapersGibbins, J. and Crane, R., "Scope for reductions in the cost of CO2 capture using flue gas scrubbing with amine solvents", Proc. I.Mech.E, Vol. 218, Part A, J. Power and Energy (2004), 231-239. Gibbins, J. and Crane, R., A preliminary assessment of electricity costs for existing PF plant retrofitted with an advanced supercritical boiler and turbine and solvent CO2 capture, Proc. I.Mech.E, Vol. 218, Part A, J. Power and Energy (2004).Refereed Conference PapersGibbins, J.R., Crane, R.I, Lambropoulos, D., Booth, C., Roberts, C.A. and Lord, M., "Maximising the effectiveness of post combustion CO2 capture systems", Proc. GHGT7, Vancouver, Sep. 2004Roberts, C.A., Gibbins, J.R., Panesar, R. and Kelsall, G., "Potential for improvement in power generation with post-combustion capture of CO2", Proc. GHGT7, Vancouver, Sep. 2004.Other conference papers etc.Gibbins, J. and Crane, R., "Reducing the cost of CO2 removal using solvent scrubbing", CRF Autumn Meeting 2003, The presentation of current projects funded through the BCURA/DTI programme, Tuesday 2nd December 2003, Alstom Power Ltd., Whetstone.Gibbins, J. and Crane, R., "Principles and performance limits for integrating amine scrubbing with coal and gas fired power plants", in Report on 6th Workshop, International Test Network for CO2 Capture (8-9 March 2004, Trondheim, Norway), IEA GHG Report Number PH4/28, May 2004.Gibbins, J. and Crane, R., "Criteria for economically-competitive post-combustion CO2 capture from pulverized coal power plants", Proc. 3rd Ann. Conf. on Carbon Sequestration, Alexandria VA, May 3-6 2004.Gibbins, J.R., Crane, R.I., Lambropoulos, D., Man, C. and Zhang, J. , "Making pulverised coal plant 'capture ready': methods and benefits", Proc. 7th International IEA GHG CO2 Capture Network Workshop, Vancouver, 10 September 2004, IEA GHG Report Number PH4/34, Oct. 2004.Ball, M., Stobbs, R., Ward, L., Gibbins, J. and Wilson, M., "A new 'capture ready' power plant project in Saskatchewan", Proc. 4th Ann. Conf. on Carbon Sequestration, Alexandria VA, May 2-5 2005.Gibbins, J.R, "Opportunities for research into near-term capture options for pulverised coal plant in China", Stanford GCEP project workshop on technical issues and challenges associated with advanced coal use integrated with CO2 capture and storage in China, Tsinghua University, Aug. 22 and 23, 2005.

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

• Viable pulverised coal capture option demonstrated, confirmed in studies with BCURA industrial sponsors

• Helped established UK lead in pulverised coal with CCS– new studies for UK and North American markets, possibly China

• ‘Capture ready’ and retrofit options for the large number of pulverised coal plants contributing to UK policy objectives on climate change mitigation

• Potential for further studies on post combustion capture fundamentals with Canada and other overseas collaborators

• Need to improve UK capabilities if any of the existing UK coal power plant fleet is to be converted to CO2 capture

- people (including PhD students)- independent expertise on existing and future commercial CO2 capture systems- how to design and exploit flexible CCS systems to make money



Pre-combustion capture ready

• Problem for IGCC, if gas turbine is matched to gasifierand oxygen plant before capture is added

• Easier for chemical plants, especially if making hydrogen

Possible alternative for IGCC –have shift from the start and recover the losses

GASIFIER

KIER Flue Gas Clean-up Technology Center

Establishment of Facility for the Development of Flue Gas Clean-up Technologies


optimisation of coal fired power plant performance when...

Documents